Ronaldo: Had Real Madrid splashing out seriously obscene
money for him.
It makes me wonder if the world has gone
mad.
In these times when banks are collapsing and people who
are losing their life savings are screaming for the lynching of
Bernie Madoff, Real Madrid are splashing out seriously obscene
money for Kaka and Cristiano Ronaldo.
I have no qualms about the rich spending money – that's their
prerogative. In this respect, Real Madrid are super-rich. Backed by
a global audience that is as likely to come from the backyards of
Bangkok as they are to come from Tetuan or Salamanca or Barajas or
any Madrid suburb, their worldwide revenue source is no longer
dependent on the earnings of the Castilian fan base.
Thus they populate their playing population with Galacticos who
in turn attracted serious sponsorship money from the likes of
sporting giants Adidas. Including money from television rights,
they are the world’s richest club and their Galacticos appeal to
every football citizen in every corner of the globe.
So for Real Madrid’s president Florentino Perez, paying a
world-record fee of £56m for the Brazilian superstar Kaka is merely
meeting expectation of a super-club. So too for the £80m for
Ronaldo.
That’s Real Madrid. They live on a different plane of reality
stemming from their aristocratic roots. They are the club of kings
and behave in no less a fashion.
English clubs, on the other hand, find all their roots in the
traditional blue-collar worker who knows what it means to sweat a
day’s sweat to earn a day’s dollar.
The mind boggles then that English clubs, I guess flushed with
the money brought about by the popularity of the Premier League,
are the leaders in spending money as if they were the next Real
Madrid – albeit without the aristocratic history and the
expectation to boot.
From the start of the Premiership/Premier League in 1992 to
date, the Big Four - Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea and
Arsenal - have between them spent a whopping £1,569,895,000 on
players (Source: transferleague.co.uk). That’s an average
of about £30m per club per season.
In the last five seasons alone, the Big Four spent £732,390,000
or £36m per club.
This silly season, the records are about to be re-written with
Manchester City and Tottenham entering the fray, and with the
expected arrival of some of Europe’s best to English shores.
Again, I have no qualms about the rich spending what they have.
But let’s face it, unlike the gargantuan machine that is Real
Madrid, only Manchester United can match the Spanish Club’s global
income, appeal and perhaps capacity to expend on players.
Other English clubs are heavily dependent on their patrons'
pockets to fund their expenditure. Roman Abramovich at Chelsea is
solely and singly responsible for keeping Chelsea solvent. So too
is Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan for the survival of
Manchester City.
Their combined 'oil money' will probably see them tempting a
host of stars to join their ranks. In Chelsea's case, they have
even proved immune to excessive failures and still remained viable.
Note the high-profile flops of Deco, Khalid Boulahrouz, Andrei
Shevchenko, Shaun Wright-Phillips and Tiago, Mateja Kezman. That’s
£79m wasted in the last five years alone.
Liverpool are not so lucky. Their patriarchs haven't got such
deep pockets as they would like. Recently the club announced
soaring debts costing them £36.5m in interest payments alone
and whose own auditors warned of a "material uncertainty which may
cast significant doubt upon the group’s ability to continue as a
going concern" (Source: The Times, June 5, 2009).
Nonetheless, manager Rafa Benitez has splash a whopping
£18m on Glen Johnson, a full-back of promise but not nearly the
finished article or not even ranking alongside the better (let
alone the best) full-backs in the world.
This expenditure is not to be balanced by the displacement of
coveted assets like Javier Mascherano and Xabi Alonso, both wanted
by Barcelona and Real Madrid respectively and both of whom would
command a sizeable sum in exchange. And by all accounts, that’s not
the end of Rafa’s spending, with much more on David Silva to
come.
Is it peer-pressure that is forcing Benitez to spend to the
point of being reckless? Last season Robbie Keane was a £21m misfit
that, financially, his club could ill afford. Remember that
Liverpool did end the season without a trophy. The fact that they
came close is immaterial. Despite running Manchester United a close
second, Liverpool are, as the American would put it, still
losers.
Should Benitez be concerned about club finances first? Should he
take a leaf out of Arsene Wenger’s book and yield to financial
common sense to keep his club afloat? After all, there is more
ambition than his coffers will allow him in the near future,
including the building of a new stadium.
There is a strong case to suggest that last season was Rafa’s
last chance to clinch the Premier League title before his club
hunkers down to some financial reality. Success was supposed to
bring richess. Failure is to be financing from one’s own
pocket.
Perhaps because of how close he came, the Liverpool board may
give him next season as a final try, but just how long Liverpool
can keep coming close and paying for it without a benevolent
patriarch is questionable.
Wenger's saving grace is that he has been exceptionally
financially successful off the pitch. If he wasn’t a football
manager, he would have readily found a job as a private banker
persuading his clients to invest in youth and them selling them for
gargantuan returns – the odd mistake like Jose Reyes aside.
Nonetheless, those are odds that any investor will readily
accept as Arsenal generated £37m in profits for the financial year
ending May 2008.
Arsene’s prudent transfer record over the history of the
re-structured League is: £259.9m spent, £180.7m recouped with a net
loss of £79.2m averaging £4.6m a season. This compares with
£391.1m; £190.5m; £200.5m and £11.7m for Manchester United and
£380.1m; £177.6m; £202.4m and £11.9m for Liverpool.
In the last five years, Arsene Wenger has done much better:
£102m; £81.7m; £20.3m and £4m compared with £169.4m; £76m; £93.4m
and £18.6m for Manchester United and £212.4m; £102m; £110.4m and
£22m for Liverpool.
Imagine that. Arsene would arguably have done much much better
if he had sold Patrick Vieira and Thierry Henry at premier prices
instead of what he actually got by waiting a season longer to sell.
Given inflation, which has seen United's and Liverpool's average
expenditure soar, Arsenal’s spending has remained surprisingly
flat, despite the arrival of record signing Andrei Arshavin.
But let's not forget that United’s average is about to take a
massive dip after Ronaldo’s transfer becomes final, whereas
Liverpool’s hoarding of players, coupled with their willingness to
splash-and-dash (read Robbie Keane), is about to take their average
over the stratosphere.
But of course, any fan will say that a manager’s record is not
defined by the profit he makes, but by the trophies he has won, and
in that respect, Wenger’s policies have been an abject failure.
To achieve success, you must have the best. The best in this
modern world gone mad, costs not only an arm and a leg, but your
children’s arms and legs as well. To compete, you have to mortgage
your future in order to secure your present.
This season may prove to be the most expensive in history. In
England alone, David Villa, David Silva, Carlos Tevez, Sergio
Aguero, Franck Ribery, Samuel Eto’o and Karim Benzema have all yet
to be priced and all may find their way into the Premier
League.
If so, that’s roughly a quarter billion pounds worth of talent
right there . . . or am I underestimating the value? Furthermore, I
haven’t mentioned the clear-out-and-buy-in of Tottenham yet. That
turnover alone may well be worth over £100 million.
And then there’s Liverpool. Glen Johnson will be the first and
probably more will follow . . . provided they haven’t gone bust by
then!
Should Benitez be concerned about club finances first? Should he
take a leaf out of Arsene Wenger’s book and yield to financial
common sense to keep his club afloat? After all, there is more
ambition than his coffers will allow him in the near future,
including the building of a new stadium.
There is a strong case to suggest that last season was Rafa’s
last chance to clinch the Premier League title before his club
hunkers down to some financial reality. Success was supposed to
bring richess. Failure is to be financing from one’s own
pocket.
Perhaps because of how close he came, the Liverpool board may
give him next season as a final try, but just how long Liverpool
can keep coming close and paying for it without a benevolent
patriarch is questionable.
Wenger's saving grace is that he has been exceptionally
financially successful off the pitch. If he wasn’t a football
manager, he would have readily found a job as a private banker
persuading his clients to invest in youth and them selling them for
gargantuan returns – the odd mistake like Jose Reyes aside.
Nonetheless, those are odds that any investor will readily
accept as Arsenal generated £37m in profits for the financial year
ending May 2008.
Arsene’s prudent transfer record over the history of the
re-structured League is: £259.9m spent, £180.7m recouped with a net
loss of £79.2m averaging £4.6m a season. This compares with
£391.1m; £190.5m; £200.5m and £11.7m for Manchester United and
£380.1m; £177.6m; £202.4m and £11.9m for Liverpool.
In the last five years, Arsene Wenger has done much better:
£102m; £81.7m; £20.3m and £4m compared with £169.4m; £76m; £93.4m
and £18.6m for Manchester United and £212.4m; £102m; £110.4m and
£22m for Liverpool.
Imagine that. Arsene would arguably have done much much better
if he had sold Patrick Vieira and Thierry Henry at premier prices
instead of what he actually got by waiting a season longer to sell.
Given inflation, which has seen United's and Liverpool's average
expenditure soar, Arsenal’s spending has remained surprisingly
flat, despite the arrival of record signing Andrei Arshavin.
But let's not forget that United’s average is about to take a
massive dip after Ronaldo’s transfer becomes final, whereas
Liverpool’s hoarding of players, coupled with their willingness to
splash-and-dash (read Robbie Keane), is about to take their average
over the stratosphere.
But of course, any fan will say that a manager’s record is not
defined by the profit he makes, but by the trophies he has won, and
in that respect, Wenger’s policies have been an abject failure.
To achieve success, you must have the best. The best in this
modern world gone mad, costs not only an arm and a leg, but your
children’s arms and legs as well. To compete, you have to mortgage
your future in order to secure your present.
This season may prove to be the most expensive in history. In
England alone, David Villa, David Silva, Sergio Aguero and Franck
Ribery have all yet to be priced and all may find their way into
the Premier League.
If so, that’s roughly a quarter billion pounds worth of talent
right there . . . or am I underestimating the value? Furthermore, I
haven’t mentioned the clear-out-and-buy-in of Tottenham yet. That
turnover alone may well be worth over £100 million.
And then there’s Liverpool. Glen Johnson will be the first and
probably more will follow . . . provided they haven’t gone bust by
then!
by Orion Assante