Takeover of club - Imminent?

[augie]

Usmanov wants our club for a reason. He likes making money.

He would do to us exactly the same as Glazer has done to Manyoo.

Totally correct.

He's a Manwho fan, so he isn't buying into us because of his passion for the club, its purely to make money.
Yes, he'd invest at first, but over a 10 year cycle he'd want a nice, fat, return.

This board - who augie continually rages against - has transformed the club over the past 20 years. Yes the make-up has changed, but the Hill-Woods have been there throughout. They've transformed it to such an extent that we're known internationally and now we are an attractive club for those who want to MAKE MONEY out of football to invest in.

And please stop going on about lack of transfer spending...aren't you use to Wenger never spending the money...he's been fairly consistent over the past 13 years! Thought people might have realised how he works as a manager !

It's really easy to destroy things buying making wholesale changes...from those who want to sack the manager, to those who want the board to go, be careful what you wish for, it doesn't always turn out how you think it might :shock:

Personally, I'd prefer people to get behind the club at a time when the press and UEFA are out to get us, rather than moan about things that, quite frankly, we can do nothing about and aren't broke!!

Robsy I would like to address your points one by one -

Why does it matter who any of our shareholders supported ? I mean really does it matter ? Do you think usmanov or whoever buys the club would invest so much money into buying our club only to take it down cos he supports another club ? All these people are shrewd business people who know that for their investment to prove successful then they need the club to be successful so I really dont see how that can hurt us Anyway we are all about to accept players and managers representing us without giving a shit about past allegences so why should it be any different for an owner or board member ? Do you believe that fiszman or lady nina were avid Gooners all their lives ?
You claim that usmanov is a businessman whose sole objective is to make money so tell me where exactly does that differ than our current board ? Some (fiszman) were coaxed into investing in the club years ago without any depth of knowledge or passion for our club while most of the rest inherited their shares and none of them have put any of their own money into the club while most have actually sold shares while the prices were high. Buying low and selling high sounds like just another investor to me.

I would like clarification on how exactly the current board have transformed the club over the last 20 years You credit the hill woods and the board for putting us on the world stage which, and I mean no disrespect to you here, is bullshit. Wenger has put us on the world stage and even as a wenger critic I would be the first to acknowledge it. Wenger and his trusted companion DD were a formidible team with one working to expand the profile of the club on the pitch and the other one networking to expand us off the pitch and in europe. In the mid 80's we were a nothing club going nowhere fast but two of DD's appointments (GG and wenger) changed all that as they broke the scouse dominance and made us one of the 2 biggest clubs domestically and one of europes biggest as well - do you think that the board had contributed much in either appointment ? As for hill-wood does he even hold 1% of the club shares now ? The man is decreped and has had his day in the same way that black and white televisions were good for a while too.

As regards the lack of spending I will admit to being caught between two stools here - on one hand it could be that we dont have the cash but on the other hand it could be that we do only wenger wont spend it. For me anyway I have to say that both scenario's reflect badly on the board - either they cannot raise the necessary funds at all or they have them and are idly standing by while wenger refuses to strengthen a sub standard team.

My outlook on the club ownership is the same as it is regarding the manager and indeed the team.....if things are not working then you simply must try changing things to improve. Yes changing any of the above may not work out but lets face it things are not exactly progressing as we are now are they ? Staying in this scenario for fear of the unknown makes absolutely no sense to me and condemns us to more of what we have seen and that is constant selling of our better players while scrapping for 4th place and that is nothing something to look forward to in my book.

Nobody loves the whole us against the world scenario more than me but lets face it right now we are our own biggest enemies and we are only fooling ourselves to think otherwise. The eduardo dive, the almunia and diaby fcuk ups and the disgusting chant has been a nice little smokescreen for wenger and the club to mask the fact that cesc's injury was totally wenger's fault for not resting him against a poor pompey side and of course they also deflected the attention away from another abysmal transfer window performance. We can only blame outside sources so far but at the end of the day it is the selling policy, the non buying policy and the sub-standard players that are affecting our chances of silverware more than anything else and it might serve the club better to ask themselves what they can do better to improve things before laying the blame elsewhere

[Tonton Zola Moukoko]

That's an argument for change, not an argument for Usmanov.

You mention he is shrewd businessman, but how do you know that? What financial success does he have outside of a corrupt Russian/former soviet republic economy?

[potter]

Usmanov wants our club for a reason. He likes making money.


It also gives him a position of credibility in the west. Like his mate at the chavs , less likely to be targeted by those that might want the money back in Russia.

[GunnerDude]

All propaganda until proven true Who is to say Fiszman hasn't dabbled into the blood diamond business at some point. We dont know how they got their millions but in the end as long as they are not Thaksin Shinawatra or the cheap pots from pompey then I am fine with it.

[Robsy]

Robsy I would like to address your points one by one -

Why does it matter who any of our shareholders supported ? I mean really does it matter ? Do you think usmanov or whoever buys the club would invest so much money into buying our club only to take it down cos he supports another club ? All these people are shrewd business people who know that for their investment to prove successful then they need the club to be successful so I really dont see how that can hurt us Anyway we are all about to accept players and managers representing us without giving a shit about past allegences so why should it be any different for an owner or board member ? Do you believe that fiszman or lady nina were avid Gooners all their lives ?
You claim that usmanov is a businessman whose sole objective is to make money so tell me where exactly does that differ than our current board ? Some (fiszman) were coaxed into investing in the club years ago without any depth of knowledge or passion for our club while most of the rest inherited their shares and none of them have put any of their own money into the club while most have actually sold shares while the prices were high. Buying low and selling high sounds like just another investor to me.

Augie, I'm going to only tackle your first paragraph here because I'm off out in a minute...I'll be back later and cover some of the other things you've written.

1. It is important that the board support the club, or at least take an interest in the club aside for purely financial. The reason being, when times get tough - and they have a habit of doing that in football - you want people behind the club to have the desire to want to stay and sort it out. You want them to create the stability on which the rest of the club can thrive. Look at Newcastle/Ashley of a great example of how a chairman who doesn't really have his heart in the club can act when things go wrong. Look at Liverpool and the mess their two owners have created, one minute wanting to sell, the next friends again. Stability comes from the top and whether you like it or not that is exactly what the Hill-Wood family have given us.

2. All these people are shrewd business people!? I'm assuming you mean the investors interested in Arsenal...sorry...gotta go...will be back later...

[donaldo]

Robsy

Does Kroenke support Arsenal?.He has been to one game and i bet 5 years ago had never heard of the club

[augie]

Robsy by the time you are back from shopping with the missus I will have you buried in paperwork and it will take you days to read it much less respond to it

Seriously though robsy I have to totally disagree with you regarding your assessment of commitment - how does a board that have all, with the exception of kroenke and usmanov, sold some or all of their shares over the last few seasons be classified as committed to the cause ? Where is the stability when fiszman has sold shares on 2 different cases to kroenke while the hill wood family have sold nearly all off grandad's shares at this stage The hill wood family have indeed served the club well down the ages but peter hill wood, bless the doddery old fool( ), has whether through necessity or not has reduced his shareholding to almost zilch and is just there now as a figure head so the club can maintain an appearance to be keeping with their tradition. Truth be told pat rice has probably as much say as phw has now

I have never bought into the arguement that one person owning a club is bad news for the club concerned. I would have thought that where there is shared power there is always the possibility of power struggles within that club. I would also suggest that the instability with the geordies is cos (a) ashley had no clue what he was letting himself in for & (b) the fact that he is keen to sell has left the club unstable and unable to appoint a boss. People, and scouse fans in particular, often forget about the financial strife they were in prior to the arrival of the yanks and as usual the xenophobia shines through as it is so easy to play the foreigners rather than have a closer inspection of the books prior to their arrival.

Robsy I would much rather kroenke took over the running of our club than usmanov and that opinion has never wavered. For starters stan has a knowledge of running sports "franchises" in the states which would give him an edge over someone like ashley but of course there is the whole public perception of the guy which isnt good. However I still cannot get my head around the fact that some would rather stick with a stagnant club cos they are afraid of the unknown instead of saying that this system is no longer working and we need to try different roads - to me doing nothing is far far worse than trying and failing

[enjibenji]

Mr wengers job wont be as stable as it is now either

[mrgnu1958]

come on STAN..tell the ruskie where to get off.

I WANT STAN! I WANT STAN!

[rtpgooner]

I think since fiszmann, hill wood and co booted 4 directors of the board they have brought this situation upon them selves.

As well all know david dein was given his marching orders, when he proposed stan to the board and hill wood said "we dont want his sort", a couple of years on and he is on the board .

With lady nina bracwell-smith at the club fiszmann and co's position looked strong but since she was booted out her 15.9% share was always going to be desive. With fiszmann at 25%, kroenke near 30% and ussy near 30%, it seems whoever stumps up the proposed £100 mil for the 15.9% lady nina bracwell-smith has is going to be in the driving seat.

Looking at it, it is obvioulsy a complete shambles and the situation should of been handled differently and the board would not have this dilemma.

My view on it is i dont really want a sugar daddy that puts however many millions of debt onto the club, but someone like kroenke who owns and knows sport, and he has not sold a single share of his in a sports business.

Where as with usmanov you dont no what you are going to get, and all we seem to know about him is how he is put across in the press and is a corrupt russian, probably under the orders of putin. No doubt if he did complete a takeover i am sure he would put david dein as the chairman, which i am sure would be to try and please most fans.

The main thing that needs to be wiped is the debt of the stadium and then the £50 million profit or whatver it is we make each year can be used for transfers which i think is plenty

Looking at liverpool, west ham, when there takeovers were going through it all looked rosy only for it to come tumbling down on them.

What pisses the majoirty of fans off i feel tho is the fact since leaving highbury we have been constanly lied to from "we will be able to compete on a financial level with the biggest european teams", to be given no proper explanation at all on the reasons any directors left the club and the same old saying on transfers that come from hill wood and co.

With a possible £60 million in the bank (£40mil greedy+toure and the money generated from champions league qualification) only 1 player bought in the summer along with the high ticket prices we pay it is understandable that some fans see it is time for a change

[CelticTiger]

No no no way i'd like him to takeover this club,

What i would like is for him to increase his stake, a while ago didnt he say that if his stake was raised, he'd pass on some of his shares to the supporters trust ?

If true than thats why i'd support usmanov.
So what about transfer funds, sure we're gonna have a chelsea done on us soon, fifa have said more clubs could be in the shits with regard to the foreign youth fiasco

[olgitgooner]

Robsy by the time you are back from shopping with the missus I will have you buried in paperwork and it will take you days to read it much less respond to it

Seriously though robsy I have to totally disagree with you regarding your assessment of commitment - how does a board that have all, with the exception of kroenke and usmanov, sold some or all of their shares over the last few seasons be classified as committed to the cause ? Where is the stability when fiszman has sold shares on 2 different cases to kroenke while the hill wood family have sold nearly all off grandad's shares at this stage The hill wood family have indeed served the club well down the ages but peter hill wood, bless the doddery old fool( ), has whether through necessity or not has reduced his shareholding to almost zilch and is just there now as a figure head so the club can maintain an appearance to be keeping with their tradition. Truth be told pat rice has probably as much say as phw has now

I have never bought into the arguement that one person owning a club is bad news for the club concerned. I would have thought that where there is shared power there is always the possibility of power struggles within that club. I would also suggest that the instability with the geordies is cos (a) ashley had no clue what he was letting himself in for & (b) the fact that he is keen to sell has left the club unstable and unable to appoint a boss. People, and scouse fans in particular, often forget about the financial strife they were in prior to the arrival of the yanks and as usual the xenophobia shines through as it is so easy to play the foreigners rather than have a closer inspection of the books prior to their arrival.

Robsy I would much rather kroenke took over the running of our club than usmanov and that opinion has never wavered. For starters stan has a knowledge of running sports "franchises" in the states which would give him an edge over someone like ashley but of course there is the whole public perception of the guy which isnt good. However I still cannot get my head around the fact that some would rather stick with a stagnant club cos they are afraid of the unknown instead of saying that this system is no longer working and we need to try different roads - to me doing nothing is far far worse than trying and failing

Augie, I can't agree that the club is "stagnant". They are not throwing money around as if it's confetti. We are not ManU, Manciteh, Chelsea or Real Madrid. This does not necessarily mean that we are not moving forward.

I will accept that ManU have been hugely successful in recent seasons. And that success has been driven by money.

But ManU are now at a stage where the money is drying up. Witness the departure of Ladyboy and Tevez. And no replacements arriving.

That club is now effectively mortgaged up to the max. The Glazers have lined their greedy pockets. And will happily walk away from a football club which they have fucked over.

Do you really believe that Usmanov will not do exactly the same thing, given the opportunity?

Please answer a simple yes or no.

[augie]

Oldgit you know yes or no answers do not exist in my vocab

Seriously though oldgit this club has regressed so much in the last few years it is fcuking frightening If we are 100% honest we will admit that the reason some fans are giving us a chance of success this season is cos manyoo are weaker without ronaldo and the scousers are weaker without alonso........in other words our hopes are based on other teams regressing rather than us improving

Some fans always use the invinceable team as the benchmark to compare this side with to show just how far we have fallen but I will go even further than that when I say that the '98 team would wipe the floor with this team and anybody that thinks otherwise is seriously delusional You are falling into the old trap where by any of us moaning about a lack of investment are labelled as looking for billions to be spent while the reality is that is way off the mark. We have heard much about wenger's much lauded scouting system and if it is only 25% as good as it is made out to be then I cannot believe that they cannot find a kepper better than almunia for less than 10m or that they couldnt get a defensive midfield better than song/denilson/diaby for less than 15m which means that we either cannot or will not spend that amount of money (despite bring in 40m+) and so are stuck watching sub-standard players while paying top whack - we seem to be investing all the money while the board are investing none so we may as well just lodge into their individual bank accounts

Anyway oldgit so far you, like many others, are putting forward reasons against people interested in taking over rather than putting up positive arguements for the current board in their own right. It appears that the only thing making the board look half decent right now is the comparison with usmanov cos if he wasnt hovering in the background I feel that they would be getting an awful lot more grief than they currently are

[REB]

i agree with augies final point, in that if it was kroneke or someone english hovering in the background people would be more open to them buying the club but because its usmanov with all the bad press he got then some people go straight on the defensive and say back the current board.
tbh to the current board they have delivered a great stadium but all at the expense of the first team,
and for a club like ours who say they have ambitions then the net spend of the last few years puts that myth to bed,
to me they the board are trying to make the mortgage come down as to make there share price look better and anyone who believes that fiszman and co are in this for the long haul are deluding themselves as only money talks for these people ,
as for usmanov not being an arsenal supporter is a poor argument when you look at the next 2 biggest shareholders,
kronke an arsenal fan all his life is he and our beloved chairman cant even be in london that often because he would end up paying too much tax so instead is a tax exile living in geneva,

[FOXYARSENAL]

great posts augie took a while to read but good agree we need change and if its usmanov then so be it he cant do any worse than the current crop in the board room and if it means getting david dein back in then please,maybe then the club can start living up to what we had been promised by the current twats a lot of people would be against dein coming back and reckon that gazidis needs a chance, i do to maybe with dein working alongside him it could be a great partnership anything for a change at the minute for me bcuz am not looking forward to the same old shit this season again