Board Sells - Kroenke Takes Control Of Club!!

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:32 pm

Oh I do you see what I mis-typed. Anyway its pointless to expect this from you but again you have yet to provide any proof as to what you believe that can be varified indepnedently.

As you can see assuming you don't choose to ignore it, I provide some real evidence for what i believe and I look for evidence to support it or if I am wrong discredit it.

You cite that one quote from the manager which can also be refuted by a number of quotes from the manager that question or contradict it and ignore any others including the one I just posted. What's up with that? And its from Pravda.com. Hmmmm......

JMascis666 · Post by **JMascis666** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:06 pm

I think the board is bad and has been since 2005.

LeftfootlegendGooner · Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:12 pm

I can't be bothered to read through so many posts........so in a nutshell can someone tell me what is wrong with the board

Post by **I Hate Hleb** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:15 pm

It's too stiff!!

TeeCee · Post by **TeeCee** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:18 pm

Yet again you fail to acknowledge the fact that Wenger is the one paying 50k a week to Bendtner, Rosicky, Denilson etc etc as wel as 20k a week to young reserves like JET. THIS is what pushes our wages up and stops us from paying more for top players, so YET AGAIN it's Arsene Wenger's doing and he is the reason why we can't progress, NOT the boards.

Boomer · Post by **Boomer** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:21 pm

LeftfootlegendGooner wrote:I can't be bothered to read through so many posts........so in a nutshell can someone tell me what is wrong with the board

In a nut shell we should have sold Highbury and not redeveloped it.
and the board are only interested in making money from there shares. No not though dividends but as there 'deliberately' driving the price up.

Oh and some spat between him and Teecee and also ignoring Flash who's proved him all wrong.

TeeCee · Post by **TeeCee** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:27 pm

I'm worried actually as he dropped me a private msg saying he'd like to meet me to share some man love as he is stiff as a board......I think 'those' websites he goes on have got him a bit over excited. I might have to warn the home office about a raving batty boy from Texas coming over here for some 'Yeeha'!!

MM99 · Post by **MM99** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:30 pm

TeeCee wrote:Yet again you fail to acknowledge the fact that Wenger is the one paying 50k a week to Bendtner, Rosicky, Denilson etc etc as wel as 20k a week to young reserves like JET. THIS is what pushes our wages up and stops us from paying more for top players, so YET AGAIN it's Arsene Wenger's doing and he is the reason why we can't progress, NOT the boards.

Can i have the link to the source for this?

Also interested in knowing what other reserves are on 20k.

TeeCee · Post by **TeeCee** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:42 pm

It was in the papers a few months back so can't get the link. It was around the time that he was arrested in his Â£100,000 car. Several Arsenal sites/blogs also quoted the numbers, like Arsenal mania and ArsenalInsider, just to name a couple. Obviously there's an amount of hearsay in anyones opinion on contracts as they don't announce them to the public. I doubt very much that JET would be able to buy a Â£100k car on 5k a week, that is for definite.

So MM, do you think it is correct for Arsenal to pay the likes of Bendtner, Denilson, Rosicky etc 40-50k a week?

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:13 pm

TeeCee wrote:Yet again you fail to acknowledge the fact that Wenger is the one paying 50k a week to Bendtner, Rosicky, Denilson etc etc as wel as 20k a week to young reserves like JET. THIS is what pushes our wages up and stops us from paying more for top players, so YET AGAIN it's Arsene Wenger's doing and he is the reason why we can't progress, NOT the boards.

Where is your evidence that this would chnange under a new manager and the at the Board would sanction a wholesale revision of the wage bill and that they have not sanctioned nor created the new wage structure in place now?

I have no problem acknowledging that the manger has agreeed those contracts. I also have no problem saying that I don't think the Board would sanction him purchasing the players to replace at then wages they would require. And if you're talking of English players I don't think they would sanction buys at the inflated prices they require unless you are talking about unproven at Premiership level teenagers. I think the fact that we're reportedly about to sign aren't even proven in the old Second Division and the last one before that was Theo Walcott. And we'll still end up paying as much for them as Tom Vermaelen.

But why don't you name the Premiership players we can get for a non-premium price and pay as little as we are paying the players you speak of now. Better still name the proven quality foreign players we can get to sign at Arsenal for as little as 50K or lower.

See again you want simple easy answers to complictaed issues and don't give a rat's ass what the consequences are and if you're wrong abotu you'll be the last one to acknowledge it no doubt.

The issue is you have no proof that anything would be sufficiently changed under a new manager because you have no real proof that the finances are down solely to the current manager, and just cannot prove otherwise. That does not make you wrong. It should make think twice though about advocating easy solutions you can't be sure are the right ones. And backing the right solution should matter just a bit more to you I would think as a Gooner. If I thought that it was the right solution I would back sacking the manager without hesitation. I am genuinely not convinced that it is.

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:37 pm

By the way one thing you and many others fail to grasp is what Augie said so well earlier on here is that even if we agree that your version of events is correct as Augie noted earlier on this thread

augie wrote: Quartz I agree totally that the board did not stop wenger spending the money that was available BUT they also stood back when wenger continued down a road that everybody bar wenger could see wasnt going to work out and THEY DID NOTHING

And that raises the all-important question of why they did nothing and seemed prepared to continue to do nothing and why we should expect them to do any differently under a new manager, which is at the heart of the debate poparticularlarly between you and I Teecee. Where is the evidence that this policy is certain to change with the naming of a new manager?

Face it the reality is one of the following -

That as I suggest the Board have not made sufficient funds available to this manager and are resposnible for for the inability to add better quality players in several instances in order to save money to create inflated profits which helped increased the club's share price. In which case the Board can be said to have managed the club decisively in the self-interest of its major shareholders.

Or as Augie suggests the Board allowed the manager to impose his own policies that weakened his own own ability to build the best possible team because well I'll let Augie say it again

augie wrote:In any business or club management are responsible for the performance of the staff working below them and just as wenger is culpable for his players shitiness so too are the board for wenger's mismanagement Of course by allowing wenger to continue down that non spending route it allowed the balance sheet to look good thus increasing their share prices so they personally were on a winner then :roll:

In which case the Board can be said have negligently managed the club.

Simeple challenge for anyone here - name one other major company guilty of such clearly negligent management or absentee management that doubled its value during that period.

TeeCee · Post by **TeeCee** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:44 pm

Mr Whippy Ice Cream, Essex UK.

Management banned hundreds and thousands from being sprinkled -bastards! I blame the board because pre-2005 they not only allowed hundreds and thousands but they also provided crushed nuts. The management are obviously under orders to do without but the fans of Mr Whippy know that if the board were ousted then toppings would return and we may even see some raspberry sauce.

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:47 pm

I guess I was right about the thirty pieces of silver....

TeeCee · Post by **TeeCee** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:49 pm

I told you Martin, I'm not interested in you, for 30 or 40 pieces of silver! Go and stalk someone else you raving hobo!

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:53 pm

You really a delusional person. If I were gay I'd have far too much taste and self-respect to bother with someone like you. I'd certainly have more than I do now, and even that would rule someone woth your character out!