TRANSFER MARKET: ARSENAL V SPURS – Who holds the competitive advantage?

I don’t think any of this will come as a surprise to anyone - but the actual figures are still interesting to analyse. I basically got into an argument with a work-mate today who has a despicable admiration for Daniel Levy

As a result, I spent the latter half of my day at work putting some figures together for a comparison between Arsenal and our hideously deformed step-brother, Spurs, over the past 10 years - specifically into how we have fared on the transfer market and how that correlates to our on-pitch success.

See below a breakdown of transfer expenditure and the balance over the past 10 years (the balance I am sure will illustrate the basic picture for revenue (currency in Euros). I have also included current and final league positions.

Although I understand the frustration with our "lack of ambition" recently.. no-one can deny that given a testing transitional period this is really a remarkable achievement. Surely a small win over the past 10 years is that even after buying a new stadium we have maintained our dominance in north London
It might also illustrate, no matter what reservations some may have about his transfer policy, but from a coaching and tactical perspective Arsene is worth every penny of his salary. A world class manager is truly priceless.. or 159,970,800EUR if this table is anything to go by.


(Click to enlarge)

Let's just hope with this wind change over our commercial deals, eradication of deadwood etc will see us truly leave spuds in our wake so we can finally go on to grab some silverware.

Daniel Levy: Forever in our shadow.

the only reason i see they are close to us is because, there are stupid clubs to offer stupid enormous amounts for their players.. Bale, Modric, etc.. yes that credit goes to Levy for knowing how to negotiate for the maximum, even if it is in a bad way..

We have Ozil, we win.

We have a better chance of landing star players in the future, which is all that matters.

Overall spending doesn't matter. ld rather buy two amazing players for a large amount, rather than 5 good ones for a little more

VendettaRed07 wrote:We have Ozil, we win.

We have a better chance of landing star players in the future, which is all that matters.

Overall spending doesn't matter. ld rather buy two amazing players for a large amount, rather than 5 good ones for a little more

This is what we have been doing for the past and it has backfired on us. Santos, Mert, Park and Arteta.2 great players and 2 useless players. Ozil siging really put us back on the map again, we are a attractive destination for WC players. We have the players, the money and the Class.

We have a great squad and only Top Top Top players can make it in to our squad.

Raptorgunner wrote:

VendettaRed07 wrote:We have Ozil, we win.

We have a better chance of landing star players in the future, which is all that matters.

Overall spending doesn't matter. ld rather buy two amazing players for a large amount, rather than 5 good ones for a little more

This is what we have been doing for the past and it has backfired on us. Santos, Mert, Park and Arteta.2 great players and 2 useless players. Ozil siging really put us back on the map again, we are a attractive destination for WC players. We have the players, the money and the Class.

We have a great squad and only Top Top Top players can make it in to our squad.

A DM and a striker IMO.

I don't quite understand what question is being debated here. Who holds the competitive advantage? Arsenal. Obviously. Because they've finished ahead of Spurs year after year after year. They have Champions League football, which Spurs don't really have. Arsenal have maybe fallen short compared to big teams that have won a lot of trophies - i.e., compared to the very high level of achievement by which fans want Arsenal to be judged. But compared to Spurs it's not even a question.

Levy has proven himself a really shrewd manipulator in the transfer market. They've bought a lot of terrific players the last few years. And they sold two excellent players in Modric & Bale for crazy prices. But there's no comparison to what Arsenal have achieved with what they've done over the past generation.

Chumlum wrote:I don't quite understand what question is being debated here. Who holds the competitive advantage? Arsenal. Obviously. Because they've finished ahead of Spurs year after year after year. They have Champions League football, which Spurs don't really have. Arsenal have maybe fallen short compared to big teams that have won a lot of trophies - i.e., compared to the very high level of achievement by which fans want Arsenal to be judged. But compared to Spurs it's not even a question.

Levy has proven himself a really shrewd manipulator in the transfer market. They've bought a lot of terrific players the last few years. And they sold two excellent players in Modric & Bale for crazy prices. But there's no comparison to what Arsenal have achieved with what they've done over the past generation.

It's not a debate, its a brief analysis...

Competitive Advantage (more specifically in this case comparative/cost advantage) is a business term and is something companies take very seriously - including Arsenal - it isn't simply looking at who finished above the other on the table.. Arsenals ability to maintain a competitive advantage in the transfer market over rivals is bigger than you think, it influences the way shareholders perceive the value of our club immensely. Sustainability of this advantage makes it harder for competitors (rivals) to compete - especially in the long run. Don't underestimate the importance of keeping our closest rivals at arms length on the business side of things. From a business perspective, finishing above them on the ladder is of course paramount - but doing so with a sustainable and cost-effective business model over a 10 year period is fantastic.

I agree Levy is a shrewd negotiator and I happen to also think hes a pretty good chairman. But I do get tired of him being harped on about like some kind of demi-god, when in reality, in the 13 years he has been at the helm he has not achieved what the Tottenham board would have hoped for. His aggressive approach has offered some success to the club, but be under no illusion, every year Tottenham fail to reach Europe is Objective #1 failed for Levy. I didn't even tap into the  additional revenue generated from clinching a spot higher on the ladder, particularly surrounding those top 4 - that is the real game-changer but I'm not bothering with it as it's just a fixed percentile and is uninteresting on a footballing level - unlike transfers.

Anyway if none of this tickles your fancy.. just consider it an A.W appreciation thread if you want - hes been copping it hard lately - including from our fans - I personally think that it's saddening to see a man who has given more than any to this club than any in the past - our greatest legend - have so many fans turn their back on him. I am not saying everyone did, nor am I saying that the man is immune to questioning but I do feel people take it too far. Certain approaches always need rectification or addressing when we feel we are underachieving.. but he's always been the best man for this job.

It is a more remarkable achievement than a lot of fans realise. As I said I didn't think anyone would be much surprised as they would assume it to be the case as people are aware of our successful model - but I still haven't seen the actual figures to support this and I thought I would share..

Raptorgunner wrote:

VendettaRed07 wrote:We have Ozil, we win.

We have a better chance of landing star players in the future, which is all that matters.

Overall spending doesn't matter. ld rather buy two amazing players for a large amount, rather than 5 good ones for a little more

This is what we have been doing for the past and it has backfired on us. Santos, Mert, Park and Arteta.2 great players and 2 useless players. Ozil siging really put us back on the map again, we are a attractive destination for WC players. We have the players, the money and the Class.

We have a great squad and only Top Top Top players can make it in to our squad.

This isn't "something we do in the past" at all though.. We did it once in 11/12 which was a window to forget for us.. no doubt about it. We panic bought and it was completely unlike Wenger to do so.. in fairness it was definitely thrust upon us by our club captain and a couple of disloyal git Frenchmen.

I think it turned out OK as far as panic buying which is never going to end swimmingly, kept our heads above water. Sure Gervinho, Santos and Park were something of a waste, but no different to Arsharvin who isn't too far away from the value of all three players - and he was supposed to be a "star" signing..

Not to disagree with your point entirely - I am all for buying world class players especially when they are a perfect fit like Ozil, believe me - and there are plenty of quality signings out there who would be a good fit, lets hope we can nab one in January. I too felt a sense of relief I hadn't felt for a long time when the Ozil deal was confirmed. We were skating on very thin ice and were becoming a club who couldn't attract big players.

Peccadillo wrote:Anyway if none of this tickles your fancy.. just consider it an A.W appreciation thread if you want - hes been copping it hard lately - including from our fans - I personally think that it's saddening to see a man who has given more than any to this club than any in the past - our greatest legend - have so many fans turn their back on him. I am not saying everyone did, nor am I saying that the man is immune to questioning but I do feel people take it too far. Certain approaches always need rectification or addressing when we feel we are underachieving.. but he's always been the best man for this job.

Oh it's all cool, I appreciate the Wenger appreciation. I guess what threw me was the phrasing of the post title and the argument you alluded to with a friend. I just thought it was obvious enough what Wenger has done with limited resources on a long-term plan over these years. And why Arsenal can still have a shot at getting a certain class of players, if willing to pay for them, whereas Spurs can't - i.e., one major manifestation of this continual competitive advantage. (In other words, is there any kind of metric with real world applicability by which Spurs could be deemed to have this advantage? Is there even a debate to be had?) But honestly I wasn't trying to dismiss your post or anything like that.

(This is a tangent, but tell me if you agree - one of my own pet peeves is how journalists and fans sometimes talk about Wenger, post-Özil, has "betrayed" his principles, when his was never a principle of austerity for its own sake, but merely spending within one's means.)

Very good analysis, Peccadillo.

All I want to add this interview/article with Arséne Wenger on arsenal.com

http://www.arsenal.com/news/features/-ozil-knew-i-wanted-him-for-a-long-time-

Wenger speaks a bit about our new financial position and how the 'spending' policy has always been the same.

Chumlum wrote:

Peccadillo wrote:Anyway if none of this tickles your fancy.. just consider it an A.W appreciation thread if you want - hes been copping it hard lately - including from our fans - I personally think that it's saddening to see a man who has given more than any to this club than any in the past - our greatest legend - have so many fans turn their back on him. I am not saying everyone did, nor am I saying that the man is immune to questioning but I do feel people take it too far. Certain approaches always need rectification or addressing when we feel we are underachieving.. but he's always been the best man for this job.

Oh it's all cool, I appreciate the Wenger appreciation. I guess what threw me was the phrasing of the post title and the argument you alluded to with a friend. I just thought it was obvious enough what Wenger has done with limited resources on a long-term plan over these years. And why Arsenal can still have a shot at getting a certain class of players, if willing to pay for them, whereas Spurs can't - i.e., one major manifestation of this continual competitive advantage. (In other words, is there any kind of metric with real world applicability by which Spurs could be deemed to have this advantage? Is there even a debate to be had?) But honestly I wasn't trying to dismiss your post or anything like that.

(This is a tangent, but tell me if you agree - one of my own pet peeves is how journalists and fans sometimes talk about Wenger, post-Özil, has "betrayed" his principles, when his was never a principle of austerity for its own sake, but merely spending within one's means.)

No it’s a valid point you raise.. The question was rhetorical really, my work-mate was making the argument that given Arsenals marketability and stature, Tottenham have been knocking on the door for too long and that it’s only a matter of time before there’s a power shift. Combined with the usual spiel about lack of ambition’ and Wenger being past it.

This is a view that’s been hinted at for a while, including in the media.. Articles about how Arsenal can to learn from Tottenhams transfer policy, Arsenals “lack of ambition” (=spending) in contrast to spurs high ambition etc etc.. Essentially there has been a growing perception that the spurs footprint is expanding and that ours is slowly dissipating – this perception to me is dangerous to the Arsenal brand. Although we undeniably have the competitive advantage on almost every front as you rightly point out, everyone is conscious of the fact they have finished one place behind us for the past 4 years, getting seemingly closer in quality and an argument (which I don’t happen to agree with) could even be made for being slightly unlucky not to have toppled us in certain instances.. or with the aid of some dodgy lasagna of course.. Point is, my workmate is right about one thing, Tottenham have been throwing a lot of resources into knocking on our door and certain media outlets are loving every minute of it – further encouraging these public misconceptions.

The reason drawing a comparison between Tottenham and Arsenal is more relevant than doing so with competitors like Chelsea and City is because its comparing apples and oranges.. they simply have completely different models to our own and the criticism is that it is a model that comes with an element of risk. Manchester United obviously have the advantage over us and to me, they in a way set the bar for what we are trying to achieve.

One debate to be had from these figures I suppose is that it goes some way to debunking some of the more spurious claims that are floating about, such as Arsenals lack of spending equates to lack of ambition. I suppose a comparison with a club like Liverpool might be just as suitable in achieving this particular argument.

Side note – I too share your pet peeve – I have heard this banded about before.. as if to say the signing of Ozil was somehow a concession of defeat in his principles – ridiculous.

@ Urban: Thanks for the article - hadn't read it. It's always refreshing to hear AW in an interview - he is one of the few managers out there who have a level of pragmatism in his goals and rubbishes away any nonsense talks. People view him to obfuscate issues or side step questions, but I believe his caution is entirely warranted and I think it's a credit to him for doing so.