As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
USMartin wrote:
Sorry I was out earlier watching my niece's band concert...
Anyhoo...
Before we panic as I understand a debt-leveraged takeover can only be financed if the owner owns 75% - plus of the club. Soomeone may have to confirm that but if that is true then unless Usmanov chooses to sell there cannot be that sort iof takeover at least.
I think right now what is really happening is that he is buying the remainder of Dan Fiszman's holdings - at least. Whether that is all he is buying or not he is compelled to make an offer for all other shares, which, and again we need to note this also, can be accepted or rejected by any sharehiolder. There is no legal obligation to sell to anyone. Remember that the Glazer takeover was preceded by a failed takeover by the Coolmore Mafia.
This means that he will hvae to make a bid for the remaining shares he does not own if he buys Mr. Fiszman's shares which is pretty straighforward. Was is less clear is whether or not any of the outside parties - Lady Bracewell-Smith and Red-and White Holdings are involved at this point.
And that really is the key right now. If both are than we have muvh to be concerned with and maybe genuinely worried about. If Lady Nina is we should stll be concerned because then Mr. Usmanov truly is sitting on a lot of as Mr. Hill-Wood once called it dead money and may feel he has no choice but to sell while he can really.
But if that 75% number is true then whether Mr. Usmanov sells or not could be huge - and tell us volumes about what has really been happening all along at Arsenal. Does anybody else have any further info on that 75% number and whether that in fact is correct?
Evening USMartin.
It's true, a debt-leveraged takeover can only be financed if the owner owns 75%.
I've also read he is in the process of buying Fiszman's and Lady BS's shares.
If this happens he will have 62%
His + Fiszman's + Lady BS's = 30% + 16.1% + 15.9% = 62%
38% left, and he still needs 13% of all the shares to get to 75%. Still a long way to go, unless Usmanov throws in the towel.
Of course the question is how is Kroenke going to pay for this? I would imagine he is taking out a loan.
Seems we still have to wait for a bit before we see who can get what for how much, and what they'll do with it.
USMartin wrote:
Sorry I was out earlier watching my niece's band concert...
Anyhoo...
Before we panic as I understand a debt-leveraged takeover can only be financed if the owner owns 75% - plus of the club. Soomeone may have to confirm that but if that is true then unless Usmanov chooses to sell there cannot be that sort iof takeover at least.
I think right now what is really happening is that he is buying the remainder of Dan Fiszman's holdings - at least. Whether that is all he is buying or not he is compelled to make an offer for all other shares, which, and again we need to note this also, can be accepted or rejected by any sharehiolder. There is no legal obligation to sell to anyone. Remember that the Glazer takeover was preceded by a failed takeover by the Coolmore Mafia.
This means that he will hvae to make a bid for the remaining shares he does not own if he buys Mr. Fiszman's shares which is pretty straighforward. Was is less clear is whether or not any of the outside parties - Lady Bracewell-Smith and Red-and White Holdings are involved at this point.
And that really is the key right now. If both are than we have muvh to be concerned with and maybe genuinely worried about. If Lady Nina is we should stll be concerned because then Mr. Usmanov truly is sitting on a lot of as Mr. Hill-Wood once called it dead money and may feel he has no choice but to sell while he can really.
But if that 75% number is true then whether Mr. Usmanov sells or not could be huge - and tell us volumes about what has really been happening all along at Arsenal. Does anybody else have any further info on that 75% number and whether that in fact is correct?
Evening USMartin.
It's true, a debt-leveraged takeover can only be financed if the owner owns 75%.
I've also read he is in the process of buying Fiszman's and Lady BS's shares.
If this happens he will have 62%
His + Fiszman's + Lady BS's = 30% + 16.1% + 15.9% = 62%
38% left, and he still needs 13% of all the shares to get to 75%. Still a long way to go, unless Usmanov throws in the towel.
Of course the question is how is Kroenke going to pay for this? I would imagine he is taking out a loan.
Seems we still have to wait for a bit before we see who can get what for how much, and what they'll do with it.
Bergkamp-Genius wrote:I wasn't suggesting he would sack Wenger...but what he would do is expect more from him...I see no way he would tolerate him going with youth and bargain buys if he was winning f all..
I think there would be some serious investment in the team whether Wenger wanted it or not..
Yeah but Wenger wouldn't stand for anyone interfering with his business and would probably throw his toys out and leave should that happen. Usmanov wouldn't want that, he's in awe of Wenger and wouldn't want to upset him.
We might have more money to throw around with Usmanov, but Wenger won't spend it anyway.
Eboue-Why? wrote:So is it possible for Kroenke to end up buying most of the shares and then him and Usmanov being the only 2 shareholders? In that scenario, would Usmanov be forced to sell at any stage?
Not forced to sell in a legal sense. He does not have to sell. However he may want to sell if he genuinely had buying the club as his goal and Mr. Kroenke would not sell to him why would he want to sit on those shares making little or nothing
See this is the problem when shareholders do not receive dividends of some sort. There is nothing to be gained from sitting on your holdings when they are this valuable. Who Needs 500K- 1M a year when you can make 40 80 or even 100 million?
But no he is not compelled to sell at any time by rule I do not believe though if anyone knows any different please feel free to correct that.
That is it.
If Kroenke does get 62%, which I'm not sure about, but if he gets to 62% then Usmanov has no real choice but to sell his shares, as they will just be 'dead money'.
Now if Kroenke is only buying Fiszman's shares, which does seem very likely - seeing as Fizman is extremely ill - then he will have 46.1%, which makes him obliged to offer the best price he's paid in the previous twelve months for the other shares. No-one has to sell them to him, and I can't see why Lady BS would. Or Usmaonv, for that matter.
Bergkamp-Genius wrote:I wasn't suggesting he would sack Wenger...but what he would do is expect more from him...I see no way he would tolerate him going with youth and bargain buys if he was winning f all..
I think there would be some serious investment in the team whether Wenger wanted it or not..
Yeah but Wenger wouldn't stand for anyone interfering with his business and would probably throw his toys out and leave should that happen. Usmanov wouldn't want that, he's in awe of Wenger and wouldn't want to upset him.
We might have more money to throw around with Usmanov, but Wenger won't spend it anyway.
Where have you read that Usmanov is in awe of Wenger? Have not heard any of those stories myself
1989 wrote:USMartin - I'm not sure about that but I read somewhere that he's going to sell two of the sport teams he owns to make up some cash.
I don't know that its to make up cash - NFL rules may force him to sell some or all of his holdings in some teams, because they are very strict about cross-ownership, but that is a valid point I believe was raised earlier though I apologize for not noticing by whom it was raised.
Eboue-Why? wrote:So is it possible for Kroenke to end up buying most of the shares and then him and Usmanov being the only 2 shareholders? In that scenario, would Usmanov be forced to sell at any stage?
Not forced to sell in a legal sense. He does not have to sell. However he may want to sell if he genuinely had buying the club as his goal and Mr. Kroenke would not sell to him why would he want to sit on those shares making little or nothing
See this is the problem when shareholders do not receive dividends of some sort. There is nothing to be gained from sitting on your holdings when they are this valuable. Who Needs 500K- 1M a year when you can make 40 80 or even 100 million?
But no he is not compelled to sell at any time by rule I do not believe though if anyone knows any different please feel free to correct that.
That is it.
If Kroenke does get 62%, which I'm not sure about, but if he gets to 62% then Usmanov has no real choice but to sell his shares, as they will just be 'dead money'.
Now if Kroenke is only buying Fiszman's shares, which does seem very likely - seeing as Fizman is extremely ill - then he will have 46.1%, which makes him obliged to offer the best price he's paid in the previous twelve months for the other shares. No-one has to sell them to him, and I can't see why Lady BS would. Or Usmaonv, for that matter.
Yes I think the dead money thing is the only thing miight force Mr. Usmanov's hand.
Where I would disagree id Lady Nina. I can see her selling to either party(there are reports suggesting she is negotiating to sell to Mr. Kroenke already, though I can see her waiting to see what she could get from Mr. Usmanov before signing anything.
Bergkamp-Genius wrote:I wasn't suggesting he would sack Wenger...but what he would do is expect more from him...I see no way he would tolerate him going with youth and bargain buys if he was winning f all..
I think there would be some serious investment in the team whether Wenger wanted it or not..
Yeah but Wenger wouldn't stand for anyone interfering with his business and would probably throw his toys out and leave should that happen. Usmanov wouldn't want that, he's in awe of Wenger and wouldn't want to upset him.
We might have more money to throw around with Usmanov, but Wenger won't spend it anyway.
Where have you read that Usmanov is in awe of Wenger? Have not heard any of those stories myself
"I chose to invest significant money in Arsenal because I consider it to be one the world's most well-structured football clubs, with one of the best stadiums and led by a genius coach, Arsène Wenger. I don't regret this investment."
Mr FINSBURY PARK GOONER wrote:Please also remember that Stan Kroenke could not afford to pay £50m he owed former share holders (whos shares he purchesed) just over a year ago. so how the hell is going to finance £500m to buy The Arsenal?
That is the key to this. It certainly makes a lie of the claims that we didn't want his sort at Arsenal.
The time has come for us to stand up and be counted! We owe it to the people who have supported this club for the past 125 years to act as checks and balances to this guys financial slights of hand.We must not allow him to buy OUR club by borrowing against it!!!
What part of "He has never done a leveraged buyout" do you not understand?
Read my reply to Rebel on the previous page.
Talk about negative for the sake of being negative.
Bergkamp-Genius wrote:I wasn't suggesting he would sack Wenger...but what he would do is expect more from him...I see no way he would tolerate him going with youth and bargain buys if he was winning f all..
I think there would be some serious investment in the team whether Wenger wanted it or not..
Yeah but Wenger wouldn't stand for anyone interfering with his business and would probably throw his toys out and leave should that happen. Usmanov wouldn't want that, he's in awe of Wenger and wouldn't want to upset him.
We might have more money to throw around with Usmanov, but Wenger won't spend it anyway.
I'm sure he respects what Wenger has done in the past and would hope given more investment in playing staff he could do it again...
But there is no way he would put up with Wengers i know best attitude if he was winning nothing...
Usmanov wants to win things of that there is no doubt, i doubt very much he would let Wenger get in the way of that no matter how much in awe of him he says he is now...
USMartin wrote:
Sorry I was out earlier watching my niece's band concert...
Anyhoo...
Before we panic as I understand a debt-leveraged takeover can only be financed if the owner owns 75% - plus of the club. Soomeone may have to confirm that but if that is true then unless Usmanov chooses to sell there cannot be that sort iof takeover at least.
I think right now what is really happening is that he is buying the remainder of Dan Fiszman's holdings - at least. Whether that is all he is buying or not he is compelled to make an offer for all other shares, which, and again we need to note this also, can be accepted or rejected by any sharehiolder. There is no legal obligation to sell to anyone. Remember that the Glazer takeover was preceded by a failed takeover by the Coolmore Mafia.
This means that he will hvae to make a bid for the remaining shares he does not own if he buys Mr. Fiszman's shares which is pretty straighforward. Was is less clear is whether or not any of the outside parties - Lady Bracewell-Smith and Red-and White Holdings are involved at this point.
And that really is the key right now. If both are than we have muvh to be concerned with and maybe genuinely worried about. If Lady Nina is we should stll be concerned because then Mr. Usmanov truly is sitting on a lot of as Mr. Hill-Wood once called it dead money and may feel he has no choice but to sell while he can really.
But if that 75% number is true then whether Mr. Usmanov sells or not could be huge - and tell us volumes about what has really been happening all along at Arsenal. Does anybody else have any further info on that 75% number and whether that in fact is correct?
Evening USMartin.
It's true, a debt-leveraged takeover can only be financed if the owner owns 75%.
I've also read he is in the process of buying Fiszman's and Lady BS's shares.
If this happens he will have 62%
His + Fiszman's + Lady BS's = 30% + 16.1% + 15.9% = 62%
38% left, and he still needs 13% of all the shares to get to 75%. Still a long way to go, unless Usmanov throws in the towel.
Of course the question is how is Kroenke going to pay for this? I would imagine he is taking out a loan.
Seems we still have to wait for a bit before we see who can get what for how much, and what they'll do with it.
Will be back again shortly, take it easy mate.
Missed this - my bad.
I agree here. Though even up to 62% he might be able to afford right now. that's half of the remaining shares available only.
Also if he is compelled to seel his NBA or NHL holdings by the NFL we could se him buy what he can foord now and then come back for the rest somewhere between now and 2014. But if that is the case forget him encouraging any more spending by the club, which we cannot accept either.
USMartin wrote:
Yes I think the dead money thing is the only thing miight force Mr. Usmanov's hand.
Where I would disagree id Lady Nina. I can see her selling to either party(there are reports suggesting she is negotiating to sell to Mr. Kroenke already, though I can see her waiting to see what she could get from Mr. Usmanov before signing anything.
I've also read he's going to get Fiszman's and Lady BS's. If he does that then Usmanov will probably sell, and that will take him over the 75%.
Has he got the money to buy those shares? No. Could he get it? Yes.
Then we'll have to see whether he sells a couple of his sporting teams to get cash, or whether he has a debt-leveraged takeover in mind.
USMartin wrote:
Yes I think the dead money thing is the only thing miight force Mr. Usmanov's hand.
Where I would disagree id Lady Nina. I can see her selling to either party(there are reports suggesting she is negotiating to sell to Mr. Kroenke already, though I can see her waiting to see what she could get from Mr. Usmanov before signing anything.
I've also read he's going to get Fiszman's and Lady BS's. If he does that then Usmanov will probably sell, and that will take him over the 75%.
Has he got the money to buy those shares? No. Could he get it? Yes.
Then we'll have to see whether he sells a couple of his sporting teams to get cash, or whether he has a debt-leveraged takeover in mind.
That's the key babu - if its the latter the current Board should never be forgiven for allowing it, no matter the reasons - including Lady Nina who was part of that Board much of the time.
Bergkamp-Genius wrote:I wasn't suggesting he would sack Wenger...but what he would do is expect more from him...I see no way he would tolerate him going with youth and bargain buys if he was winning f all..
I think there would be some serious investment in the team whether Wenger wanted it or not..
Yeah but Wenger wouldn't stand for anyone interfering with his business and would probably throw his toys out and leave should that happen. Usmanov wouldn't want that, he's in awe of Wenger and wouldn't want to upset him.
We might have more money to throw around with Usmanov, but Wenger won't spend it anyway.
I'm sure he respects what Wenger has done in the past and would hope given more investment in playing staff he could do it again...
But there is no way he would put up with Wengers i know best attitude if he was winning nothing...
Usmanov wants to win things of that there is no doubt, i doubt very much he would let Wenger get in the way of that no matter how much in awe of him he says he is now...
I doubt Usmanov would be that involved in the day to day running of things. A more likely scenario would be that he would put in place a Chief Executive and have him and the board as his link to the club. So if the CEO and the board report back to him that the club is making profits each year and in a good financial standing whilst also operating near the top of the league then i can't see Usmanov making drastic measures.
But then again this is all guesswork on my behalf due to experience, so who knows what he would do if he ever actually did take over Arsenal.
