Before we start, let?s get some issues out in the open:
1. Arsenal FC are a football club and winning trophies, not making money, is the goal. I fervently believe that.
2. When not rooting for Arsenal I work in PR for a number of companies that are involved in sports so I have some idea what I?m talking about.
So here is my question: Why is it that a very successful team, from the capitol of England doesn?t have the same marketing muscle as Manchester United?
I recognize that Man United have benefited from being an elite team for a decade now, at a time when the football world exploded (in both popularity and economic terms). But Arsenal should have been able to keep pace with Man U just by the sheer fact that they are in London. Add to that that Arsenal have been highly successful for the last six years or so. Their appeal should have been even greater to international companies. French, Dutch, Brazilians, English, now Spanish players as well, all internationally known.
What happened? How is it that Arsenal haven?t been able to take advantage of the situation? They had the natural benefit of being in London, plus an exceptional, international squad. Do Ashley Cole and Sol Campbell appear on billboards all over London (ok, Freddie probably does)? Do any Arsenal players make guest appearances on TV shows (chat or scripted)?
I?m sure many of you out there are ready to type your, ?you just don?t get it you silly American, we?re Arsenal, we only care about winning on the pitch!? Yes, I understand that. But being a marketing juggernaut didn?t stop Man United from being successful, or Real Madrid. In fact, it has helped them finance the purchase of players.
I?m not suggesting the club slap a crest and a price tag on everything that moves. This isn?t about quantity of items, it?s about the value of their corporate partnerships. You?d think they?d be able to get more money from just about everybody (Nike, 02, etc.).
With stadium news this week the question of stadium naming rights was brought up. I would be hard pressed to think of another stadium in the world that should be getting a higher value for naming rights than Arsenal?s new stadium. You?ve got an exceptional squad that should be playing European football for years to come. Should be challenging for domestic honours. Plus, this brand-new, state-of-the-art facility will surely be the site of England national team games, no? That should be GBP$15 million a year, easily.
In a perfect world we?d call it Arsenal Stadium or Ashburton Grove. But that?s not the world we live in. Let?s get the right sponsor, and maximize our assets so that Wenger can continue to field a top-level squad.
29 Responses to “Why Aren?t Arsenal Footballs? 800-pound marketing gorilla?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 27th, 2004 at 8:11 am
Rick,
I don’t rally know where to start, I would suggest that Arsenal don’t have the same marketing clout as Manure for various reasons.
Firstly, In the last ten years we have not been as sussessful as them. That is a fact. We may play the more attrictive football now but that has not always been the case. Manchester U have won 7 Prem tittles compared to our 2. They have also had greater European success - including winning the Champs League - where we have been pretty awful. On those facts alone who is a potetial sponser going to look at?
Then there is the national perception of the two teams, like it or not, Arsenal are not a liked team. Wthout going into too much detail this stems (I think) from the Bank of England, aristocratic days of Herbert Chapman (lucky Arsenal) and the defensive style of the George Graham teams…(boring, boring, arsenal). Man U are much more popular national, for one the Munich disaster cemented them in the national psyche forever. There are for more Manure fans in London than Arsenal fans in Manchester (if any?). And let’s not forget the media’s obsession with Man U (Sky TV hold shares in them and their reporting is so biased it makes me laugh).
The natural benefit of being in London you speak of is what? Traditionally in England, football has been dominated by northern teams (Arsenal the exception) - London has nothing to do with it.
Anyway, that’s all from me…
February 27th, 2004 at 8:19 am
Yes, Manchester United have been more successful over the last 10 years than us. It all comes down to (I believe) the difference in the size of stadia. In otherwords MONEY!
When ManUre regulary achieve 65k+ gates and we get approximately 25k+ less - youre talking about a massive difference in gate revenues. With their superior income, theyve admittedly spent well. They have a huge marketing operation present in Europe and Asia and now with the purchasing of Howard, the US.
The very fact that they have this level of income is just the same as any business - they make more and they can spend more. ManUre have spent more than most on increasing the size of their squad, thus making them more successful on the field.
Don’t get me wrong - whilst the Drunkard from Salford has been building the side for 18+ years, he/they have achieved an awful lot. If Graham had stayed on - who knows where it could have taken us. Plus, Wenger has done remarkably well since he arrived in England (and long may it continue), he has achieved what most managers wouldnt. Namely, getting the board of Arsenal to invest in the new stadium.
Wenger sees the bigger picture. He knew the club had to increase their gate values if he wanted to compete in Europe and keep on attracting/paying for the best talent to come to N5.
Also, I hate to admit it - but having a couple of media whores in the Beckhams have increased ManUre’s profile globally. Fans in Asia have actually stopped following ManUre and now follow Real Madrid on this very fact. Incredible!
Without a doubt, Beckham has increased ManUre’s profile beyond their wildest dreams. The ManUre board all knew it too, Peter Kenyon voiced his disgust when he was sold. But Ferguson was always going to win that one.
It has been said that Real have made a profit of ?27 million on Beckhams move - YES ?27 Million on top of the ?22.5 transfer!
Whilst Wenger doesn’t want a media circus distracting his players - he does want that gate money!
Well, thats my take on it anyway!
February 27th, 2004 at 8:21 am
From an outsider’s perspective I think there is one huge thing that hurts Arsenal marketing-wise. First and foremost, the name means nothing to anyone outside of England. Manchester, Liverpool and Real Madrid benefit from having place names that are known the world over — you say Liverpool to a Chinese farm child and the kid is bound to start singing “Love Me Do.” That name recognition helps. If the club was called “London Arsenal” I think it’d be a different story. But it’s not, and after the sad sack display I saw from plastic Real Madrid fans the other day, I hope it never will be.
To explain the Real thing: Watching the Vigo game on Tuesday at the bar and they’re showing the Real/Bayern match on half of the TVs… All these Real fans packed in to see their ‘galacticos’… and when Kahn gifts them the equalizer it took them about 20 seconds to react. They didn’t even realize their team had scored. If marketing brings these fans, I say stop it before it even gets started.
February 27th, 2004 at 8:22 am
Some valid points Rick, but I fo rone am very glad that Arsenal have not marketed themselves more aggressively. As you know, AFC have always prided themselves on their “class”. We may not be the best team in terms of trophies won, but in terms of class, nobody can say they are above us.
I certainly hope that this policy does not change too much. I don’t want Arsenal to become the next global brand ala ManUre.
In understand that marketing partnerhsips will bolster our coffers even more, but the new stadium will bring in plenty of extra funds for AW to play with. We don’t need to be able to spend ?30m on one player or ?100m in one summer. The odd big signing and a few smaller ones will keep us going just fine….
February 27th, 2004 at 8:27 am
Sorry Nick,
Had to mention about Sky’s stake in ManUre - they actually sold this the day before the Rio scandal went public (mmmm!).
Wouldn’t surprise me if they had an insight on Ferguson’s legal rows either.
But yes - you are right - Sky’s coverage is horrendously one sided. Haven’t heard too much about Scholes, Neville/Keane etc. Handbags at OT made Skys Sports News every hour for 6 weeks.
I don’t even want to get started on that one!!!
February 27th, 2004 at 8:27 am
By natural benefit of being in London, I mean that they are in close proximity to banks, gov’t., media, advertising agencies, corporate HQs, etc.. You’d think that Arsenal would have been getting chummy with these folks over the last four or five decades, similar to what Real has done in the capitol of Spain or the Yankees have done in the media capitol of New York.
February 27th, 2004 at 8:46 am
Excellent topic, Rick. I, too, work in marketing, and see the problem as maybe a lack of effective branding.
The Arsenal has the dubious distinction of playing the foil to Man U. Their lack of real success in the European theater strands their legacy in the premier league, where their “brand” has only been largely recognized as chief rivals to Man U. We can’t be separated with any power until we begin to build a sense of dynasty that will effectively erase football’s memory of an impressive run by Man U in the world theater. In other words, we may be perceived as sloppy seconds, the “other red team”, and while that can allow for a few intermittent moments in the spotlight, it rarely happens without mention of Man U. The Arsenal need to distinguish themselves as solid champions, putting distance between them and the glitter of teams such as Man U and Chelsea. A different, less glamourous style of football needs to prove itself emphatically. No poster idols or Spice Girls’ connections means the media will need to dig into a club of class that announces its dynastic arrival with a thunderclap. And then, when Man U make their pilgrimage to the US in the “Champions Tour” in 2004, it will look like the wrong red flags are flying.
The good news is that it seems to be happening. The Arsenal, especially in the US, will have a difficult time being ignored. Especially if me beat the hell out of Man U next month, who’ve lost their poster boy, and lets face it, Nistelroy has the look of someone who really needs to be punched.
Again, things seem to be changing. Sir Alex is acting like the initial stages of senilty or the DT’s are finally setting in, and Arsene Wenger’s genius is looking to be lauded by the world before year’s out. That being said, my idea, if I were in the Arsenal marketing department, would be to make the most of Ashburton Grove opening through the success of Wenger. He does a great job of keeping it real and deflecting the onslaught of accolades that can damage their focus , and will never allow one of his players to take on the media darling role. It may appear as if the attention on glamourous teams like Man U and Chelsea, their disappointing seasons pending and withstanding, will lead the world to believe that they’ve been swindeled and that a new style of approaching the game of football has finally arrived.
All that BS being vented, performance of the ilk that the Arsenal is showing will take them where they need to be all on its own. Trophies are even more impressive than any angle of haircut, pop star, or Purple Nose.
Gunners, again.
February 27th, 2004 at 9:12 am
They did? well, my info is obviously a little out of date. But it doesn’t really detract from their obsession with the mancs on which we’re agreed is annoying, frustrating even.
February 27th, 2004 at 9:24 am
Yes, understood. Maybe a reason for this (and I’m speculating) is a different approach to sport and football in particular in England compared to certain other countries. Footballers have not always been so well paid, most of the players from the not too distant past now have quite normal jobs.
Lets not forget also that Arsenal are a club of tradition and stability, they had the same sponsor (JVC) for years before signing with SEGA. O2 is only third third sponser Arsenal have worn on the shirts since sponsorship began in this country.
I think it’s only the last few years that any teams have been turned on to what may be acheived finacially, it’s just a shame that one certain team seems to have been turned on quicker!
February 27th, 2004 at 10:08 am
Good points ScottyUS. I think last year’s unlucky surrender of the title put an obvious dent in the progress of Arsenal supplanting Manure, which is why it hurt so much. It looked for a while that the power shift that Wenger spoke of the previous season was upon us, and then the media, refs and opposition would defer to us rather than Manure. But too many injuries and VanN’s incredible form took the title back north.
Winning this year, if it happens, will make last year look like the exception rather than the rule. Arsenal fans already know last year was the exception. The rest of the world could find out soon and the power shift should cement itself. It will also be helped when Porto toss Manure out of the champion’s league, knock on wood.
Again, nice post. Maybe you marketing guys will work out a wider plan for upping Arsenal’s profile in the states? My thinking has been on making Thierry Henry into the footballing world’s Michael Jordon (at least in terms of unreal and visibly superior athleticism, if not in terms of the final, dramatic, final seconds game winning product; this is more the territory of recent Manure teams, come to think of it, although it looks like Arsenal are getting the hang of this habit as well). Get Spike Lee to do the promo and make the point. Make Arsenal America’s urban favourites somehow, and let it go from there. I am not in sports marketing, so do not know the research on how much ’street’ culture affects buying patterns in the suburbs. Maybe it does? I know many more suburban kids buy rap records than urban kids.
Get 50 cent to wear an arsenal top in a video and watch inner city kids in london (even in Tottenham) start buying into the phenomenon as well. (London is 30% non-white, so a decent sized adolescent market exists, especially as street culture seems to be relatively uniform among non-white kids of all backgrounds.) Teenagers in my neighborhood in North London wear all kinds of NFL, MLB and NBA hats and coats, even NHL stuff. Sometimes I wonder if they even know who the teams are. I also wonder where they get the money for those damn expensive parkas. Probably sweatshop knockoffs, the lot of ‘em, which means the Arse will never see the money anyway.
February 27th, 2004 at 10:10 am
1. 2 clubs in Manchester - 10 clubs in London, 5 of which play in the Premiership.
2. Arsenal is not even the only club in North London so supporter base is extremely fragmented.
3. Man U is run as a business (as opposed to a football club) and tied up with US and Asia firms during the peak of their success
4. David Beckham is a globally recognised ‘icon’ - more so than Man U is a global brand
5. Someone posted that Arsenal were not known outside the UK - not true - they have supporters everywhere I have travelled - from Portugal to Africa to India.
6. I would guess a larger percentage of Man U supporters are ‘fair weather’ - supporting Arsenal has over the last 28 years been a labour of love.
February 27th, 2004 at 10:58 am
Very interesting points, as well, and thank you.
I have to admit that when I saw that photo of Spike and Henry my eyes nearly leapt out of my head. “There it is!”, Arsenal edging into American commercial legitmacy via the urban market. And what better place than NYC? How far away could Philly and Detroit be? I’m always skeptical about Spike’s pull on the market being what it once was, but on the same token, he may need Henry as much as Henry/Arsenal needs him to manifest their destiny abroad. Having once situated himself as a thinking man’s sports fanatic, he could be an effective mouthpiece for a game that needs better articulation. I wonder what could be in the works as we speak.
And there is no doubt that the Arsenal is more of a multi-cultural entity than even our South London rivals, Chelsea, and certainly ManU. While “hip-hop thuggery” seems to be the order of the urban market, what really talks is money. With the new stadium, a few trophies, and a high-profile player of color, perhaps a few inner city fellows might start dropping the orange ball and kicking it at each other.
Of note: there is an ESPN commercial running now that shows various famous sports figures of today in excellently mocked scenarios where they are achieving glory in other sports. For example, Serena Williams spiking in volleyball, Ace hurler Randy Johnson getting an important strike at bowling, and NFL quarterback Michael Vick scoring a game winner on ice. I wonder if Lebron James would be interested in heading a ball into the onion bag? In other words, and in line with your spot on concept of bringing Henry and Arsenal to the American market via the multi-cultural inner cites, Madison Avenue could begin introducing the sport of “soccer” through established names here, and then let the Arsenal’s success speak for itself.
Of course, there is the little problem of the term “football”. As silly as it is, it provides a point of contention even before the aspects of the game are discussed. On this point, the EPL, the most natural choice with the fewest language barriers and top flight play, will always seem like someone else’s idea of a sport. Of course, a few clever, non-contentious ads directed at the anamoly could do the trick.
All in all, I see any exposure to be positive. Perhaps the “fall of ManU”, a team who’s popularity will again be put into advertisers minds in the months to come, may go far to create that all important American sports ethic?self-destruction. Somewhat ironic, perhaps, that the slippery bitch that is success can create the most interest when tragedy is introduced. Now if we could just get the Arsenal to look like the David that did it, and there you go.
February 27th, 2004 at 11:08 am
I think Arsenals popularity worldwide is on the increase slowly but surely as we have more success.
I think historically when overseas fans looked at the english league they saw 2 teams, Liverpool in the 70’s and 80’s and Manchester United in the 60’s and 90’s. These are the teams that have won the most titles and were/are televised most therefore get a higher amount of the foreign fanbase.
Arsenal have also never really dominated for a long period of time, we had a few years in the 30’s and the again post war, and small amount of success in the 70’s and late 80’s/early 90’s.
The world cup in the USA ‘94 and in Korea/Japan ‘02 bought the worlds game to a new stage and fans picked up on this…fans who got hooked on english football post ‘94 world cup saw Manchester dominating and fans who followed after the ‘02 saw Manchester again dominating - with their pinup midfielder beckham. As mentioned in a post above, some of these asian fans have now switched allegences to Madrid as they seem to support the player and not the team.
Arsenal being a London club is also a hinderance for 2 reasons.
1. There are many other clubs to follow - including the scum a few miles down the road.
2. It is incredibly hard for a London club to win the league with all the London derbies we have to play. I think this season a quarter of our games (roughly)will be against London opposition. How would Liverpool or Manchester cope playing local derbies that often?
The world is slowly starting to appreciate Arsenal, not for who our pinup number 7 is, but for the football played on the pitch - something i am very happy about.
February 27th, 2004 at 12:01 pm
While I recognise there is a connection, I’m not talking about fan support here. I’m talking about corporate sponsorship. I would think that a successful, London-based team with a multi-cultural team that plays on live television worldwide every week between August and May would be of tremendous interest to a global company (at least one more besides Nike).
February 27th, 2004 at 12:08 pm
I don’t think there’s any truth in any of the other reasons given, it’s simply down to success. Man Utd’s popularity is purely down to their level of success over the past decade. It’s all down to kids in the playground, supporting that team, and the knock-on effect that has as they get older.
We need to establish a period of domination, and then we will absolutely have the same level of marketing power. The fact that we’re in London is much more appealing to worldwide fans. If you go on holiday, into the back streets of strange places, they don’t know about Liverpool, or Manchester. You say England, they say London.
The good news is that our success is paying off, it really is. More and more kids are wearing Arsenal shirts, Arsenal is becoming fashionable, sexy. More so than ever before. I’m living in the middle of England right now, and incredibly, there are as many Arsenal shirts on the streets around here, as Man Utd. I think kids are really associating with Thierry Henry, he’s a superstar, the best player in the world?, certainly the best combination of looks and talent, Ronaldo is fat and goofy, Zidane is white with a bald spot. We can only hope that Henry goes onto become a bigger and bigger star.
The down side is that if we do become such a club, it will become almost embarrassing to be an Arsenal fan, like it is to be a Man Utd fan today. Fighting against injustice is your birth right as an Arsenal fan, when everyone loves you, that’s taken away. They’re no longer yours. You’re just a muppet, following the best team.
February 27th, 2004 at 12:18 pm
There is a term for your view: the small town grocery store owner view. You’re telling me that if you had the chance to sign a world class player or two, you wouldn’t do it?
February 27th, 2004 at 12:36 pm
I think the corporate support definitely follows the fan support; that is the whole purpose of the corporate support, no?
I think the most important part is the winning. As in the other posts, if you are dominating for a long stretch that is the biggest factor in the fan support. It’s true that a lot of the support you gain is the fair-weather type. But of the most recognized clubs, the majority of the fans are fair-weather. Yes, Real Madrid and ManU have hundreds of thousand of hard core fans, but they are a small fraction of those clubs’ fan base. The corporate support is not following the hardcore fan support. Liverpool’s corporate support is probably not what it used to be, since they haven’t consistently won lately, and while they have some residual fans from their glory years, they are probably losing fans at this point, rather than gaining. I imagine their corporate support is following suit.
February 27th, 2004 at 12:39 pm
As I keep saying Arsenal is not a PLC. Lets not forget also that Arsenal is a club of tradition and stability and the board had made it clear Arsenal will always be run by it board of directors.
How do they make money if they don’t want alot of outside help. Before Sky joined forces with United, Arsenal was one of the clubs they look at. But they failed like most companies/Business and Sponsors will not be allow in. Sad but that is Arsenal.
Arsenal had the chance going big under Graham in the 1970?s but decide against it. Before I gave some reasons look at Leeds and Manchester United at the moment. Also look at all the former or other bigger clubs in Europe. They are owned by big businesses, and if they are not in huge debts gone down in their league.
Madrid is sponsor by the city of Madrid. The difference between us and Liverpool, United and Newcastle are the size of the stadium and seen by the people as a local club. In London we have 17 clubs and in North London alone there are 6 clubs about 20 minutes from each other.
They have a good marketing system but the problem is big businesses/Sponsors will want to see Arsenal on the shock market. Look at the new Stadium, the money could have been raise years ago but Arsenal and it Board of Directors didn?t want too many outside involvement but a loan system.
February 27th, 2004 at 1:05 pm
I wonder why Arsenal are not part of the Championsworld series that happened last year and is being repeated this summer. ManU and Celtic are taking part again and it’s a fantastic marketing opportunity for North America. I don’t know if they turn these invitations down in favour of preparing the players better for the new season or if they’re just not invited.
February 27th, 2004 at 2:26 pm
keep up the good thinking; we’ll crack madison avenue yet
February 27th, 2004 at 2:45 pm
Check this link from Aresenal.com - indicative of marketing efforts abroad?
http://www.arsenal.com/sportsappcontroller.jsp?command=selectCategoryAndNewsItem&nextPage=news_headlines_news_item&type=com.sportapps.news.NewsItem&parentId=15&id=4399660
Pretty low-key stuff, from a marketing perspective. In all I would say a typical mix of brand exposure, commercialism, youth work (building a future fan base) and charity, typical of how the club tends to do things here in the UK and in other countries (like Rami Shaaban’s Arsenal-sponsored youth work in Egypt, for example).
February 27th, 2004 at 5:44 pm
I agree that the “World Wide” popularity of ManUre is/was a Beckham driven phenomina. Someone pointed out above that large parts of the East dumped Manure for Madrid when he was sold, just as they dumped Liverpool for ManUre years before.
The American Market is the 800 lb Gorilla. The EPL deal with sky was about 2 billion, for a 10 month league. The NFL deal with Fox/CBS was a 17 billion dollars deal for a four month league. Even getting a crack at the american market would be a windfall. To be honest, economically speaking, we dodged a bullet when Beckham was sold to Madrid. He was just about to explode as a cultural icon/pop star in the US just prior to being sold. US TV was only beginning to mention him. ManUre didn’t even sell out all the American venue games last year (all the northeast games did, but any one of the teams playing could have sold out those stadiums as many people went to all 3 matches due to the proximity and limited chances to see their teams) THe LA game was only about 70% full against club America, who brought most of the fans. Beckham MIGHT have been enough to crack the American TV market (something more than YES)(and I know this is an Americentric thought) but that is the gold mine.
There is a real chance that an American Football owner might take over ManUre soon, Glazer. But your kidding yourself if you don’t think Glazer could have gotten a Beckham ManUre a better TV deal in America.
For what ever reason, Madrid has not been as willing to get in bed with the American Media, as Merchandise United were/are.
As we dodged that bullet, IMO, reports have stated that Arsenal lose a million quid a match day to ManUre because of the stadium size, maybe the new project will level this out.
February 27th, 2004 at 9:05 pm
We have signed world class players, Vieira, Henry, Pires, Campbell to name just a few recently. We have also generated a fair few through our academy. We’ve also bought a lot of hard-working above average players who’ve helped the club win several trophies in the last few years. We are 2nd in the number of FA Cups won, we’re 3rd in the number of Leagues won (hopefully getting bloody close to 2nd this season) and are the only team to double the League and FA Cup (not to mention being tied for the lead in Domestic Doubles). We’ve also won two European trophies and are simply lacking a European Cup (which we’re getting much closer to).
And long may it continue… but I do not support ManUre, nor do I want to… are you really suggesting that success is simply bought? Ask ManUre fans in the last few years whether their “world class” signings have made their club more successful? One League, that’s it (and they got that cause we through it away…) Ask them how, exactly, they became so successful in the first place - they were always one of the most supported clubs, which increased a lot after the European Cup and Munich air disaster and, despite a slump in the 70s and 80s, regained their success in the 90s, not through buying big-name players, but by building young talent - exactly what Wenger’s been doing in the last few years and Ferguson hasn’t. Admitted, Wenger’s methods of recruiting such talent were different (he went abroad rather than to the academy), but money arrives on the back of continual success, not big names…
This view, by the way, has nothing to do with “small town grocer views” and if you knew anything about football you’d know that too…
I resent the fact that people can suggest that The Arsenal should abandon their traditional class and sell out for success… we’ve been pretty damn successful so far and with Wenger’s lead and Dein’s support, we’ll be more successful yet (in England, and in Europe too!)
February 27th, 2004 at 10:05 pm
I believe that Arsenal is on the verge to becoming well known international powerhouse with an increasing international fan base. Most people I know that have a passing interest in soccer (Americans of course) know the teams like Real Madrid, AC Milan, and Man U but aren’t as familiar with Arsenal. But with the success they’ve had the past few years and the building of their new stadium, I can see the beginnings them becoming one of the more elite teams. Now is a great time to get the word out about Arsenal. I’ve already been surprised to see as many Arsenal supporters in such a small state like Arkansas. It would be great to get Americans to take a better look at Arsenal, just in case America one day comes to truely appreciate the great game.
February 28th, 2004 at 12:35 am
This is from the resident poet from Brighton and Hove Albion, I thought it was somewhat appropriate for this discussion on money and football. I’m not saying I totally agree with it, I just thought it was an interesting take on money gone amuck in football. If nothing else, it’s good for a laugh at the bluenoses from the west. Also, I cannot quite tell all of the words he’s saying, so bear with me on that, too…
Most of the time you’ll find his place is quietly tucked away, he’ll buy a bunch of crusties from the RSPCA, but when you see the latest one I’m sure you’ll agree, that every creature in it has a Premier pedigree, its funded from the billions leached by private profiteers, from Soviet old resources built up over the years, so take a walk down Stamford Bridge and soon you’ll plainly see, the universe is most a most exclusive donkey sanctuary, Donkey Sanctuary, donkey sanctuary, hey Mr. Abramovich, would you buy one for me? They’re over priced, they’re over here, they’re playin for Chelsea! He wants a new one every day so he puts in a bid, and each new one costs double the last one did, that’s twenty times more than they would’ve cost a week ago, the price is right for Roman however high ya go, and all the while most of our clubs are fighting to survive, with handouts and collections just to help them stay alive, call that market forces, i call that right wing shit, in football, and in life, we’ve had far too much of it, donkey sanctuary… so hate man u forever, but hate chelsea even more, rejoice each time they lose a game, abuse them when they win cause they’re a plastic football club and profiteers may think, that money is the people’s game and that that’s how it should stay, but a curse on the traitors who gave Soviet wealth away, a few clubs get the millions the rest go to the wall, so lets kick out the users and lets take back the ball, donkey sanctuary, donkey sanctuary, hey Mr. Abramovich, would you buy one for me?
February 29th, 2004 at 11:54 am
If you’re a Gooner, you’re not a muppet. The muppets are the ones who toss their ManU or Liverpool or Chelsea or Real Madrid or AC Milan shirts into the closet or trash and start putting on the Arsenal kits. You remember Kaba Diawara hitting the woodwork at Elland Road as well as Michael Thomas at Anfield or Ray Kennedy at White Hart Lane or Sylvain Wiltord at Old Trafford. You remember Graham Rix penalty miss in the shoot-out at the Cup Winners Cup as well as you do Charlie George or Alan Sunderland or Ray Parlour at Wembley. You remember Stepanovs nightmare at OT as well as Liam Brady and Thierry Henry crushing S***s with moments of magic. You remember the bad as surely as you do the good, something the muppets can NEVER claim. And the best part-there will only be more and more good for the foreseeable future, and those who supported as they suffered through the bad and yes boring times only deserve as much-and many here moreso than myself even. Be Proud to be a Gooner no matter but especially now and in the next several years…
February 29th, 2004 at 5:19 pm
As a Londoner, I thought I would just register to make a contribution to this thread.
I have shared your concern about Arsenal’s reticence in marketing for some time. As the biggest club in the biggest city in Europe, it is uniqley positioned to exploit the global football market, but appears to choose not to. This is largely due to the semi-aristocratic culture of the club, which has traditionally emphasised decorum and authentcity above brash promotion and money-making. Some fans think this is a good thing, but I think it is responsible for the many periods of underachievement during the club’s otherwise great history.
The culture began to change when David Dein bought into the club in the early 1980s. The extraordinary reforms that the club has undergone since then are due to his modernising efforts (including the appointment of Wenger). However, we still under-exploit foreign markets.
Within the UK, however, don’t worry - we are massive, massive news. Our top players (Campbell, Cole, Henry, Pires, Ljungberg, Vieira, etc) are on billboards, TV adverts, etc. We have fans across the country. The public profile of the club is huge. All this was true even when we were a mediocre team in the mid 1990s. Ian Wright was a celebrity.
Some of it is down to the individual personalities of the players. Man Utd have had flamboyant individuals over the past decade, such as Cantona and Beckham, who are easy to promote. Arsenal have only really had Wright. The rest of them are quiet, ultra-professional players who focus on their game (and are encouraged to do so by Wenger). Cole and Campbell are good examples. So the situation may change if we start signing/developing outlandish, easily-marketable players (watch out for David Bentley - he had his own official website when he was 16!).
I too would like to exploit the commercial potential of the new stadium. I don’t care if it is called the Exxon Nike McDonalds Microsoft Phillip Morris AOL Time Warner American Express Haliburton Stadium. I just want the club to make as much money as possible.
March 1st, 2004 at 8:22 am
Bit of a pisser if you’re trying to sing “The Boys from Highbury”
March 1st, 2004 at 8:35 pm
Arsenal are also thinking of taking the FA Cup to Scandinavia this spring. Actually it’s going to Copenhagen and then the Swedes and Norwegians can come to down here. Arsenal are very popular in Sweden thanks to Ljungberg but there’s also a lot of support in Norway. They are nuts about english football up there with the largest supporter groups in all Scandinavia by far.
I’m not sure that it’ll increase the numbers of supporters of Arsenal by any significant numbers but hopefully it would increase the number of members of the Danish supporters club who’s responsible for all the arrangements.
I just hope it all works out. I’d love to get my picture taken with the trophy.