Board Sells - Kroenke Takes Control Of Club!!

[Perryashburtongroves]

I hear that the first signing is Joe Cole

[MEDINABOY]

i dont pretend to understand the financial goings on of company take overs but i do have one question i would appreciate if somene could answer.it appears in the case of mufc and lfc the clubs were bought intrinsically with thier own money.if this is so can this be stopped and the purchaser in this case kronke,be made to protect the financial integrity of the club?

[gunner_ace]

Im no expert either but ive read the model proposed by stan the man has been vetted by the current board and given the thumbs up. He is not going to load the club with debt a la liverpool and mancs.

Then again if he aquires 90% of the shares and triggers the automatic purchase of the remaining 10%, he will own the club outright and can do whatever he dam well wants. So he can re-mortage us to the hilt, and no-one can do anything to stop him

[richpye]

Im no expert either but ive read the model proposed by stan the man has been vetted by the current board and given the thumbs up. He is not going to load the club with debt a la liverpool and mancs.

Then again if he aquires 90% of the shares and triggers the automatic purchase of the remaining 10%, he will own the club outright and can do whatever he dam well wants. So he can re-mortage us to the hilt, and no-one can do anything to stop him

I don't believe this to be true. Because the shares are quoted on the Stock Exchange and the Board release to the Stock Exchange stated that no form of debt finance would be used, I am certain this would be classed as lying to the stock exchange and is punishable by jail term?

People hold shares for more reasons than just making money from them and they cannot be lied to to be tricked into selling them

[QuartzGooner]

I am very much in the wait and see group as to how this will turn out. Too many question still need to be answered, and Usmanov's defiance this morning suggests it may yet run and run.

One good thing hopefully will be stronger links with Kroenke's American sports teams.
Those teams have very cutting edge training and physio set ups, and I hope their sports science approach can help cut our injury problem.

[badliebenzell]

Very much a case of wait and see for me. In one sense I'm pleased a bit of the uncertainty about ownership has been removed. Things simply could not go on the way they were.
Equally though, I am sure that spending on the transfer front will not change much in any shape or form. Usmanov would, on the contrary, have made funds available on that score.
We will undoubtedly see more Americanisation when it comes to Marketing, though hope not.
My conclusion is that in the short term change will be very minor. In the long run, far more difficult to predict.
Wish Hill-Wood and Gazidis had got the bullet though.

[GoonerJim]

So its proven that the board creamed off the cash for themselves and poor Arsene was in no way to blame.... What happens next?

That's it pure over-simplification - though it makes more sense than your thesis

No Arsene Wenger shares some blame - just not as much as you believe or for what you believe.

Arsene Wenger made no effort to challenge the Board on any of this and cooperated with it. I suspect that is why he has gotten the last two or three contract renewals and the improved terms with them.

But I think the Board's decision to re-develop Highbury which only made them richer as we see now fatally undermined what had been a very successful on the pitch and efficient off the pitch self-sustaining business model up to 2005. Arsene Wenger is at fault for not condemning that decision or its results and challenging the Board to correct its own greed-driven errors.

The one thing in his defense is that if the Board's policy changed his will as well, which is what we want in the end.

I just tend to believe the odds are its more likely that the Board was willing to give up the silverware for the club for more silver for themselves than Arsene Wenger was for his ego. And ask yourself this - is this were any club but Arsenal what you believe then?

Does it really matter if the board made themselves some money over our move to the new stadium? If we didn't build our own stadium we would've ended up at Wembley, or worse still bidding for the Olympic stadium. Don't be fooled by our status while we were at Highbury, Wenger would've moved on, we would've dropped out the top 4 into mid table obscurity and don't think for one minute we would've got a top class manager to replace him at that time either.
It can be argued that we sustained our on pitch status because of Wenger not in spite of him.
Imagine, we could've gone 6 season without silverware, still at Highbury, aiming to finish fifth. Now surely, that would give us legitimate reason to be unhappy.
While I understand the sentiment of "Arsenal FC, not PLC", we've been a plc since the time of Henry Norris, so where were you in 1910?

Actually the alternative to AG was Kings Cross....

[I Hate Hleb]

Might have been more appropriate after the way the Board prostituted themselves!!!

[USMartin]

A saw a hooker there take out her pimp with her purse three when he tried to take it from her so he could get his money. Good on her, though I'm guessing she took her payment in coins cause she really nailed the bastard!

Or judging by how he ran off, maybe he was just a s***s supporter trying to raise money so he could buy a ticket to the next match at the shithole!

[Peeman]

Im no expert either but ive read the model proposed by stan the man has been vetted by the current board and given the thumbs up. He is not going to load the club with debt a la liverpool and mancs.

Then again if he aquires 90% of the shares and triggers the automatic purchase of the remaining 10%, he will own the club outright and can do whatever he dam well wants. So he can re-mortage us to the hilt, and no-one can do anything to stop him

Apparently Usmanov definitely not selling his 27%. He said he bought them coz he's an Arsenal fan and will not be selling.

[USMartin]

Actually if Mr. Kroenke acquires 75% of the shares he can place his debts for borrowing to pay for the club on the club's books.

However even now he can act with similar effect by taking out a dividend which he could use to pay for any loan to buy the shares he has or apparently has (given the complicated nature of the purchase of some of the shares in question).

But this is why Mr. Usmanov refusing to sell is quite important, as it would certain preclude any debt leveraged purchase, but would seem to also pre-empt the possibility of dividend servicing any debt, as Mr. Usmanov woulkd receive a fairly significant dividend that would cost Mr. Kroenke a pretty penny he would would want to use perhaps.

The question though is what now? Can Mr. Kroenke afford to buy the 62% now and if so then, does he eye trying to buy Mr. Usmanov out or does he see if Mr. Usmanov can't buy him out? Or are they ready to work together withing the Board Room? Or is it more of the same until someone makes on odffer one or both oo them simply cannot refuse?

[Boomer]

This whole thread seems a little pointless in the whole scheme of things...

*We've already been told nothing will change.
*Usmanov has told the stock reuters that he will not sell.
* The AST have also advised not to sell.

With todays news of Danny Fiszman it looks as if the sale was passing on responsibility of the shares.

[USMartin]

With todays news of Danny Fiszman it looks as if the sale was passing on responsibility of the shares.

What does that have to do with Lady Nina's shares?

No I think while its perfectly appropriate to put personal opinions and judgments of Mr. Fiszman and his actions aside right now, it is hardly sensible to abandon our concerns over this issue as a whole period, no matter how eager you may be that we do so.

[Boomer]

With todays news of Danny Fiszman it looks as if the sale was passing on responsibility of the shares.

What does that have to do with Lady Nina's shares?

No I think while its perfectly appropriate to put personal opinions and judgments of Mr. Fiszman and his actions aside right now, it is hardly sensible to abandon our concerns over this issue as a whole period, no matter how eager you may be that we do so.

I knew you'd pick up on that.

She's been looking to sell for ages so we knew it was coming but didn't know into who's hands the shares were going.

I'm not prepared to have a debate over this, not tonight at least.
For once let's just turn our thoughts Danny.

[USMartin]

With todays news of Danny Fiszman it looks as if the sale was passing on responsibility of the shares.

What does that have to do with Lady Nina's shares?

No I think while its perfectly appropriate to put personal opinions and judgments of Mr. Fiszman and his actions aside right now, it is hardly sensible to abandon our concerns over this issue as a whole period, no matter how eager you may be that we do so.

I knew you'd pick up on that.

She's been looking to sell for ages so we knew it was coming but didn't know into who's hands the shares were going.

I'm not prepared to have a debate over this, not tonight at least.

For once let's just turn our thoughts Danny.

I would quietly agree except the post I made had nothing whatsoever to do with Mr. Fiszman anyway and made no reference to him. To everything there is a season and the time to discuss Mr. Fiszman will come when its approprate, which is not now.

But the simple truth is all that was being discussed was the situation with Mr. Kroenke and Mr. Usmanov which still goes on just ss Arsenal Football Club goes on, and as poor as it may sound especially now we all say no man is bigger than the club.

So why use the tragic events to try to and divert attention from ongoing concerns that will effect the nest several years and even decades for the club? As that appears to be what you are doing based on what I actually posted that you replied to, even if that is not your actual intent.