PHW - We'll sell for the right price

[Belfast Boy]

Jesus guys just when I thought that popular opinion was finally changing with the "can you still defend Wenger" thread here we are again, back to slaggin off the board for all and sundry with the same old arguments that, altho borne from frustration no matter how understandable, still do not stand close scrutiny

[gus ceasar is a legend]

"The directors don’t want to sell but we are a public company. It depends on the price" Peter Hill-Wood


Now the man has said himself that it is only the price that holds them back from selling and the only ones who will benefit finacially are the shareholders.

So this lock down agreement that exists to protect Arsenal from buyout and possible ruin is all well and good...............until the price is right!

No mention of the type they would sell to, how they would take Arsenal forward and how secure finacially the new buyers would need to be...........just the price and profit gained!

That is what needs to be scrutinised Gary!

[REB]

sorry belfast boy but when two directors of our football club come out in the press with two different opinions and contradicting each other then i feel the need is there to be discussed,

[Belfast Boy]

"The directors don’t want to sell but we are a public company. It depends on the price" Peter Hill-Wood

First things first Steve can I just reiterate that I don't for one minute think our board are perfect, why would I??? and no-one is!!!

.............. but as a PLC they are bound by Stock Exchange trading laws which means they must do what is best for ALL the shareholders right down to the man in the street who owns maybe only one share!

The board are also human (no - really, they are) and so must realise that they are not getting any younger and the attention paid to the Premiership as the most exciting/watched league in the only truly global sport from some of the seriously big money men on the global stage seems to be ominous, as it is patently obvious, the ownership of an English club seems to be changing from fashionable to becoming the must have status symbol for the 21st century multi-billionaire!

All I can say is that time will prove or disprove the character of the board if and when they eventually do sell out, and regardless of popular opinion their track record suggests that they'll make the right decision not only for themselves but for the future of the club as they and AW have put a lot of work into getting the club to where it is and unfortunately the unique breed that the football fan is, it doesn't seem to be appreciated one iota!

Realistically we're probably all aware that the board will never sell prior to the Highbury Square project reaching it's natural conclusion and the revenue it'll create, and then and only then will it be the right time to sell cos even tho we want success now, only in a couple of years from now will we fully appreciate the vital role the current board played in the evolution of Arsenal into a modern superclub (shameless plug there - maybe ) and especially and easily IMO the most important thing of all, keeping the club in N5, a massive massive plus in favour of DF and co. cos while a super-rich Arab could certainly have also built us a shiny new stadium, we know damn well it would've ended up on the M25, which would've had the Totts dancin in the streets - literally!

[olgitgooner]

I think PHW was just being honest. As a public company, the board has to look after the best interests of the shareholders. If they receive a massive offer for the shares, they are sort of duty-bound to recommend it. Even if they are anti-takeover.

PHW wouldn't personally gain, as he has only a token shareholding.

The rest of the board are so rich, they really don't need the extra cash.

[gus ceasar is a legend]

I know you do not believe that the current board is perfect and you rightly say nobody is. I do think though that we can doubt the integrity as well as the unity of the board when the most influential board member and chairman contradict each other.

I know Hill-Wood is largely just a figure head and his comments should be taken with a pinch of salt but I find it ludicrous that the club still allow the old duffer to make statements on behalf of the club. The PR disasters come almost daily and seem to me driven by a lack of cohesion. As you say the next step is getting in the revenue from the development but it also worries me that if this is the final goal for the current board then may have fallen further behind financially or missed the boat altogether.

I am undecided about all of this as on the one hand I do not want an idiot like Ashley in charge of us and being a billionaires play thing but on the other I do genuinely fear for the club and its current direction. I find this notion of being self-sufficent and being able to compete with the "big boys" fanciful and unrealistic. Yes we may well be self-sufficent but then again so is my local shop but it does not have the buying power of Tesco and is worth a hell of a lot less. So ultimately the extra cost has to be passed on somewhere.............you and me, Arsenal's "customers"!

This is where Dein is right to question the difference between the boards value of a wealthy football club and the status quo of the other big clubs. Fiszman tells us about £50 million being generated every year which sounds fantastic until you put up against the financial clout of private investors. To them £50 million is the price of a decent full back and goalkeeper! The playing field has been totally shifted whether we like it or not and in a few years we will not have the genius of Wenger (genius that may still prove to be flawed ) to keep the club competitive. Like I have said before, the next manager will be a mere mortal and will need investment to keep us where we are now. If we are scratching around with £10 million pound signings whilst others are buying the creme de la creme for £50 million then we will soon be toppled of our perch.

Like I say I do not know the solution but surely somewhere there has to be a compromise between the current apparent short sightedness and being a Sheik's fantasy league team which he gets bored of after a few years and tosses aside. This compromise has to be found or we will end up in the clutches of a Usmanov or find ourselves looking forward to Legia Warsaw away in the UEFA Cup.

[Belfast Boy]

Cannot disagree with anything you said there Gus, but can I just reiterate (again) that we'll see exactly what the board stand for if and when they sell their shares, as I'm sure they would resist any offer that relied on shifting the debt onto the club a la ManUre, L'pool cos otherwise what was the point in goin thru all the hassle of the last 7 years unless as many on here suspect it was merely a money making ruse to fleece the fans by justifying the price hikes we have had to endure, and if that does prove so, I'll not only be extremely disappointed but bewildered at the sense of it all!

[gooner.ed]

money talks. at the end of the day if there are enough clubs with owners who throw money at them, then those clubs will more or less divi up the major prizes, because the best players will gravitate towards those clubs.

arsenal's stadium move was planned at a time when the likes of abramovich and rich foreign investors who did not plan to run a club on business lines were not a factor in football. that has changed. should the board have foreseen that coming? the stadium move was done for one reason and one reason only - to hang on to the coat-tails of manchester united.

so the board instigated the stadium move to keep the club competitive over the long term, realising significant income would be needed post-wenger and that highbury would not make enough.

then in 2003 abramovich rode into town and others - with a variety of agendas - have followed. the stadium was half constructed before chelsea won their first title.

the goalposts in football have changed. there are now owners prepared to run clubs as a plaything and pour money into a black hole doing it. but as yet, only at 2 clubs in this country. if that becomes 4 or 5 then arsenal are f**ked. because there are not enough quality players to go round.

so it's watch this space, really. however, much as i would prefer the arsenal board to any other at the moment, i agree with gus that there is no dynamism amongst the directors and a serious lack of expertise regarding football today. incidentally, david dein is not the answer there - his lack of commercial nous was what prevented us taking over liverpool in the 90s after dethroning them, leaving the way clear for man utd.

and very little PHW says goes through the press office. so that's why you will get him not taking the club line and fair play to him for that.

[QuartzGooner]

I just do not feel that Hill-Wood and Fiszman have contradicted each other.

They want to keep running the club, but are duty bound to consider all genuine offers.

There is one thing that always sits in the back of my mind.

None of the board need the money as Gooner.Ed says.

If they did though sell, for a huge sum, they would earn huge sums of cash.

Yet what would they DO with their lives?

Would they be able to flll a void in their lives that has until know been filled by Arsenal?

Every man has his price, but maybe there are things money cannot buy?

Or maybe they will each take their share of cash and go into another business, sport, or arts patronage, in some way, shape, or form?

[IbleedRED&WHITE]

Apprantly David Dein has resigned from his post with red and white holdings. Not sure what that means in terms of that fat russian thing making moves on our lady?

[Belfast Boy]

Apprantly David Dein has resigned from his post with red and white holdings. Not sure what that means in terms of that fat russian thing making moves on our lady?

There's already a thread up a running about his resignation!

[augie]

Gooner.ed you rightly say that the club could not have foreseen the abramovich factor when planning for the new stadium but you ignore the fact that for the last few seasons we are being outspent by clubs like sunderland, villa,citeeh and the scum never mand chavski, the scousers and manure This is in total contradiction to statements made about how we would be able to compete in the transfer market with the very biggest clubs in the world cos in reality not alone have we not been able to compete in the buying of players but we are losing players at an alarming rate.

My anti board feelings may not be well known ( ) but leaving those feelings aside here we have to be feeling very real concern here. We are being left behind by the top clubs and are being caught up upon by the clubs in the next tier of the premiership. We may or not be shifted from our top 4 spot this season but how long will that remain the case if the likes of citeeh continue to reinvest in their squads ? People who point to chavski for the last 2 seasons as proof that money dont buy success totally ignore the results of the previous 2 seasons and this for a club that were not even in the top 3 clubs in london before that.

I am not bothered if we do not get a super super rich owner a la citeeh or the chavs but I do think we need to be in a position to spend far far more than we currently can and it seems obvious to me that will not be possible with the current ownership of the club

[Rob]

the board are a long way from perfect, but would you rather have west ham's? newcastle's? man utd's? chelsea's? who else's board would you prefer at arsenal?

You are right on the first part.

Hill-Wood's latest twist of position - if he has been quoted correctly - is

“We want the club to stay in its current ownership,â€

[Rob]

so it's watch this space, really. however, much as i would prefer the arsenal board to any other at the moment, i agree with gus that there is no dynamism amongst the directors and a serious lack of expertise regarding football today. incidentally, david dein is not the answer there - his lack of commercial nous was what prevented us taking over liverpool in the 90s after dethroning them, leaving the way clear for man utd.

.

This reiterates a point you have made in the Gooner editorials Kev and it just isn't so.

Man Utd began their commerical expansion on the back of the Best, Law Charlton team. Ironically at the very time that team started to break up and they began their on pitch decline.

Martin Edwards started the 'corporate hospitality' kick at Old Trafford in the 1970s. Their fan base was always huge, even when I started going to Arsenal in the late 60s and early 70s. Certainly their attendences were - on average - well above ours.

Dein did not arrive at Arsenal until the mid 80s and can hardly be held responsible for alledged inaction prior to that.

Real Madrid's massive commercialism surely dates back to the great 1955 - 1961 team.


I don't see how Dein could possibly be held to account for failing to get us to match such developments elsewhere. The same goes for other Board members.

In the 1990s we actually started to close the gap between us and the rest; and the Board as a whole, including Dein, must take some credit for that.


Commercially - thanks to the stadium - if not 'historically' we are now ahead of Liverpool. But to really match them in every way we need to win the CL - more than once

[IbleedRED&WHITE]

Apprantly David Dein has resigned from his post with red and white holdings. Not sure what that means in terms of that fat russian thing making moves on our lady?

There's already a thread up a running about his resignation!

and my point was is this a development in the board selling up? should i have said...

with this happening (please see other thread http://www.onlinegooner.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=9401) is this a development?