COPS in Highbury (BADDD BOYS! Whatcha Gon' DO?)

[QuartzGooner]

Fellas you are all just wasting your time!

Look back through the history of the forum and you will find this topic debated with the same facts figures etc only different people sucked in to a debate with the obsessive compulsive USM Babbitt.

I seriously think the guy is a WUM, another panto, monostich, etc

This forum has been dragged into a state where the majority of threads are turned into the USM show.

If there is one person who is more interested in using arsenal has a tool to give his sad life meaning that USM I would be surprised.

Don't feed the troll!!! Just say 'Yes Martin, you are right'. Maybe only then will he bugger off!!!

USM blots his copybook in two ways.

Firstly his theory has been hideously savaged by Frankbutcher, STG, FlashGunner amongst many others.
What USM says may be true, in part, maybe not, but there are other plausible reasons for Arsenal's recent decline than what USM says.

There is no mutually agreed proof either way.



Secondly USM has reposted his theory on here for a solid 14 months.
But not once has he started a blog, Twitter account, Youtube Channel or Facebook page to spread his theory to a wide audience.

Instead he is content to keep repeating it on here, to the same 100 or so regular readers.

Why?

For what purpose?

[HashKads]

Fellas you are all just wasting your time!

Look back through the history of the forum and you will find this topic debated with the same facts figures etc only different people sucked in to a debate with the obsessive compulsive USM Babbitt.

I seriously think the guy is a WUM, another panto, monostich, etc

This forum has been dragged into a state where the majority of threads are turned into the USM show.

If there is one person who is more interested in using arsenal has a tool to give his sad life meaning that USM I would be surprised.

Don't feed the troll!!! Just say 'Yes Martin, you are right'. Maybe only then will he bugger off!!!

USM blots his copybook in two ways.

Firstly his theory has been hideously savaged by Frankbutcher, STG, FlashGunner amongst many others.
What USM says may be true, in part, maybe not, but there are other plausible reasons for Arsenal's recent decline than what USM says.

There is no mutually agreed proof either way.



Secondly USM has reposted his theory on here for a solid 14 months.
But not once has he started a blog, Twitter account, Youtube Channel or Facebook page to spread his theory to a wide audience.

Instead he is content to keep repeating it on here, to the same 100 or so regular readers.

Why?

For what purpose?

Sexual arousement.

[marcengels]

[redstevo]

I AGREE WITH RAINMAN!

[USMartin]

Fellas you are all just wasting your time!

Look back through the history of the forum and you will find this topic debated with the same facts figures etc only different people sucked in to a debate with the obsessive compulsive USM Babbitt.

I seriously think the guy is a WUM, another panto, monostich, etc

This forum has been dragged into a state where the majority of threads are turned into the USM show.

If there is one person who is more interested in using arsenal has a tool to give his sad life meaning that USM I would be surprised.

Don't feed the troll!!! Just say 'Yes Martin, you are right'. Maybe only then will he bugger off!!!

USM blots his copybook in two ways.

Firstly his theory has been hideously savaged by Frankbutcher, STG, FlashGunner amongst many others.
What USM says may be true, in part, maybe not, but there are other plausible reasons for Arsenal's recent decline than what USM says.

There is no mutually agreed proof either way.

I have to ask you what is the definition of savaged hideously because I'm thinking if you actually read my discussion with Frank last night that it might mean hideously savaged the way it would here.

I mean last bnight Frank labelled my views naive because the Board would never hold back investment in the football team because failing to succeed more on the pitch would drive our share price down. Then I usef simple facts available to any Gooner such as the the share price of the club from 2001-2004 and from 2005-2011 to show that the share price was not nearly so dependent on our success on the pitch and winning of silverware as he suggested, and his explanation as to why I was wrong was basically to say exactly what I was saying twhich was that people were buying shares even though we were not investing more in the team and achieving far less on the pitch. Please explain how that was being hideously savged. I am most curious.

Indeed he seems to be contradicting your notion which suggests that the share price is solely effected by people choosing to buy the stock and the company has no influence whatsoever over when or why anyone buys stock. I suppose I was savaged them too eveb though your own allies for want of a better word now seem to be contradicting your arguments too.

Curious.

[frankbutcher]

Marty,

I think my theory makes perfect sense. It proves that the share price rose regardless of negative events such as Highbury Square. The share price rose because of the move to the Emirates and the fact that two willing buyers sought the shares (supply and demand?). Even now, when it is clear our commercial revenue is poor and the Club is only just breaking even after stripping out player sales and property interests, the share price continues to rise. This is illogical, and proves how flawed your theory is. Just remember, the shares are not like those on the FTSE or NASDAQ. The shares might as well be privately owned. The shares do not react to events that you are setting out. Your theory is flawed.

Support UKFranky. You know it makes sense.

[USMartin]

There is no mutually agreed proof either way.

As yes now I know why you were DCI Quartz...yes we must have absolute, no wait definite proof simply to even raise the question of whether the Board acted properly. We don't need that to prove they didn't and conclude our Board behaved honorably in every instance, or that Arsene Wenger has simply refused to spend all this money that was made available to him, do we? To believe the Board requires simply want ting to believe them. To question them however we must already be certain the amswert will be acted improperly.

I think that sums up what you have been saying all along. I mean you refuse to explain why when you are willign to say we don't know for certain was has been happening why you felt no need or desire to raise even the most reasonable questions in that regard. Please feel free to expl;ain to me if I have misunderstood that. I am happy to acknowledge a mistake or misunderstanding or unfair characterization to anyone.

Secondly USM has reposted his theory on here for a solid 14 months.
But not once has he started a blog, Twitter account, Youtube Channel or Facebook page to spread his theory to a wide audience.

Instead he is content to keep repeating it on here, to the same 100 or so regular readers.

Why?

For what purpose?

What's next, where's my birth certificate? Say what's on your mind. But you should be careful here. You showed in another thread you don't like having your love for Arsenal questioned.

I could debate the whole question but its the same false argument as the wole just say it once and stop theory

[QuartzGooner]

USMartin's theory is just a theory.
UKFrank's theory is too, but it is one I think makes more sense than USMartin's.

Always have done.

It is a new dawn, a new era, and the old school owners knew this.

Millionaires out, billionaires in.


USMartin can only present evidence for inspection, but no proof.

Over a year ago he was told this, but ignored it.

Just keeps on presenting the same theory over and again on here.

Why?

Why only on here?

What does he hope to achieve?

Why here?

Why not somewhere else?

Why keep on even when all and sundry are familiar with this theory?

Why not take this theory to the published media?

Why not use Social Media to publicise it?

Why confine it to this medium sized Arsenal Forum amongst a sea of blogs and Forums?

Why not question the former board members directly?

Why insult other posters who disagree?

There is no logic to any of this and no sense in it.

[USMartin]

Marty,

I think my theory makes perfect sense. It proves that the share price rose regardless of negative events such as Highbury Square. The share price rose because of the move to the Emirates and the fact that two willing buyers sought the shares (supply and demand?). Even now, when it is clear our commercial revenue is poor and the Club is only just breaking even after stripping out player sales and property interests, the share price continues to rise. This is illogical, and proves how flawed your theory is. Just remember, the shares are not like those on the FTSE or NASDAQ. The shares might as well be privately owned. The shares do not react to events that you are setting out. Your theory is flawed.

Support UKFranky. You know it makes sense.

Let me remind of what you actually said -and have contradicted - once again

Your arrogance is staggering.Do you not see how naive your view on the Board is? If they were withholding cash from Wenger, which has lead to our decline, that doesn't make any sense. Can you not see that a Club that fails on the pitch, eventually fails off of it? Fans stop going, and sponsors stop sponsoring. If you drop out of the Champions League, disaster......

Speculate to accumulate. A basic rule of business.

Wait - I thought you were saying Arsenal's stock doesn't work that way above. Which is it? I mean either the share price reacts to events or it doesn't . In the post above you say it doesn't but in the origianl post you insist it does. Again which is it? Let me guess - whatever you want to believe when it suits you?

Care to explain how that first statement has any consistency with what you are saying now or will you just contradict yourself yet again simply to escape having to admit that maybe you are wrong.

[flash gunner]

Blimey type is now bold and enlarged

He means it this time lads

[frankbutcher]

Blimey type is now bold and enlarged

He means it this time lads

[Henry Norris 1913]

martin, you've convinced me, your right.

hail wenger

[frankbutcher]

Marty,

I think my theory makes perfect sense. It proves that the share price rose regardless of negative events such as Highbury Square. The share price rose because of the move to the Emirates and the fact that two willing buyers sought the shares (supply and demand?). Even now, when it is clear our commercial revenue is poor and the Club is only just breaking even after stripping out player sales and property interests, the share price continues to rise. This is illogical, and proves how flawed your theory is. Just remember, the shares are not like those on the FTSE or NASDAQ. The shares might as well be privately owned. The shares do not react to events that you are setting out. Your theory is flawed.

Support UKFranky. You know it makes sense.

Let me remind of what you actually said -and have contradicted - once again

Your arrogance is staggering.Do you not see how naive your view on the Board is? If they were withholding cash from Wenger, which has lead to our decline, that doesn't make any sense. Can you not see that a Club that fails on the pitch, eventually fails off of it? Fans stop going, and sponsors stop sponsoring. If you drop out of the Champions League, disaster......

Speculate to accumulate. A basic rule of business.

Wait - I thought you were saying Arsenal's stock doesn't work that way above. Which is it? I mean either the share price reacts to events or it doesn't . In the post above you say it doesn't but in the origianl post you insist it does. Again which is it? Let me guess - whatever you want to believe when it suits you?

Care to explain how that first statement has any consistency with what you are saying now or will you just contradict yourself yet again simply to escape having to admit that maybe you are wrong.

You really are dim! I'm saying that there is no reason for the Board to withhold money, and that they weren't witholding money. They wanted Wenger to spend it. BUT HE WOULDN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm also saying that whether he spend it or not would not have affected the share price, as there were two willing buyers of the shares, driving the price up. The Board sold out and left two Billionaires to fight over the Club. The Board did not withhold cash to inflate the value of the Club, so that they could sell out at a high price.

[flash gunner]

martin, you've convinced me, your right.

hail wenger

#


me too the board are *word censored*

[QuartzGooner]

You are desperate now USMartin.

UKFrank makes sense.

Of course increased assets make the club more desirable.

But if the club slips on the pitch, then regardless of share price, the shares become less desirable.
Because revenues fall with lack of team success.

Certainly not in the interest of directors who would be looking to sell, or prospective buyers !