I'm an Arsenal fan, so I totally appreciate the long-term benefits of a solid financial model. But it's also pretty obvious that it's held us back massively in the short term; building the Emirates and having to control costs aggressively in the decade since that decision is the reason we currently lack the squad to challenge consistently for the PL, let alone the Champions League. By contrast, Man City and Chelsea's respective sugar daddies have kept them in the fight. Even 'pool have John Henry. The hope is that now the Emirates is paid-for, we can get back into the transfer market and compete properly again. But we're starting from back in the field compared to the less financially-challenged clubs. Actually, Man Utd face the same problem now (but worse, as they're in lots of debt), of needing to spend a lot to get back up the table. Grammaton's OP asked us to consider how SR could compete with mass-market RTW brands like Brioni & Zegna. My "ideal" answers are from the perspective of that question: i.e. that the only ways it could actually manage that would be through rich owners' financing or extremely risky moves to cut costs of their core product. I don't think they're "ideal" from a more general perspective of "how should SR run its business". I think the middling option I outlined that you also quoted is the most practical. But I also don't think it will work in the long-term (i.e. 2 or 3 decades down the line), based on how much rents are increasing. I think they'll all have lost the rental battle by then. They'll have to move somewhere else then, but by then any publicity buzz around such a move may be gone. I'm not massively optimistic, to be honest. The Gieves model of some remaining bespoke, used as a halo to sell indifferent RTW where it can, will be all that's left by then, which will be a shame.