It is currently Fri Aug 17, 2018 7:54 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1118 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 75  Next

Should Arsenal offer Usmanov a place on the board?
Yes - He is a major share holder 53%  53%  [ 19 ]
Yes - Providing his position ties in with the boards 11%  11%  [ 4 ]
No - Under no circumstances 36%  36%  [ 13 ]
Total votes : 36
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:00 pm 
Offline
Acclaimed member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:23 pm
Posts: 2769
he will raise money by improving the marketing. he will make arsenal a brand in america that man untd are right now in asia. being big in asia is good, but being big in the US is something far far bigger. thats one avenue i can think of.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:04 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:41 pm
Posts: 647
Location: Watching Arsenal conquer Europe!
If it is definate that he will put the club into more debt, I wouldnt want a takeover.

Someone said we only have 5 years to pay of the debt for the stadium, I believe it is a 25year loan.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:19 pm 
indiangunner wrote:
he will raise money by improving the marketing. he will make arsenal a brand in america that man untd are right now in asia. being big in asia is good, but being big in the US is something far far bigger. thats one avenue i can think of.


Rubbish. Sell the club to improve marketing in America? Sounds like a good deal!

NOT.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:23 pm 
Jay wrote:

David Dein has always had the best interests of Arsenal FC in his heart, I believeand has been the driving force behind the club for years.

So why is he so supportive of a takeover which will burden us with a greater debt and will give us minimal money for investment ?

There has to some other angle behind it, that we are not seeing.


Basically Dein becomes boss number one and gets paid a bigger salary. That is his motive.
I think we shouldn't underestimate the contribution of other directors/mangers at Arsenal. Whilst they don't put themselves in the media spotlight as much as Dein they should still be attributed as part of the 'driving force' too.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:37 pm 
I am glad to see that - at least at Arsenal Land - cheap flapping of a few dollar bills (which might actually be photocopies of real bills, given the financial strength of that Yank) doesn't make people throw their hats in the air in orgasmic happiness.
It is not about the Arsenal being owned by English, British, Commonwealth or Rest-of-the-World riches. The essential question is: What are the motives of any potential candidate? With Roman's take-over of Chelsea the answer seems clear: he's got the ultimate hobby, he has no business interest in the club whatsoever, he does it for his ego (which ultimately is a good thing for Chelsea). The situation with those Yanks couldn't be more different: they see it as a business opportunity. I can't think of one single reason why Kroenke should put more than a couple of bucks into the club. As an old-time rich german once said: we have our money from keeping it, not from spending it!
A take-over by one of these people (Gillette, Hicks, Kroenke etc.) holds much more dangers than prospects. The whole thing gets completely insane since the Arsenal doesn't need additional money - yeah, it would be a nice thing to have, but NEED - No. I have no doubt that nothing good will come from a take-over of that sort.

And Dein:
We have to look at him unbiased and realistically! The great things he did for the club but also his bollocks (Wembley, Ericson). He is not the superman some see in him and for me he's dead wrong with supporting a take-over bid, as he was with Wembley, as he was with Ericson. Don't glorify him!!!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:45 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Posts: 3276
Location: Dublin
lukichaircut wrote:
Jay wrote:

David Dein has always had the best interests of Arsenal FC in his heart, I believeand has been the driving force behind the club for years.

So why is he so supportive of a takeover which will burden us with a greater debt and will give us minimal money for investment ?

There has to some other angle behind it, that we are not seeing.


Basically Dein becomes boss number one and gets paid a bigger salary. That is his motive.
I think we shouldn't underestimate the contribution of other directors/mangers at Arsenal. Whilst they don't put themselves in the media spotlight as much as Dein they should still be attributed as part of the 'driving force' too.


I do not believe that for a second.
Dein already had all the power that he needed at Arsenal and as for a bigger salary, I cannot see an already extremely wealthy man risking his place on the Board of a job he loved doing for a bigger salary.

In my opinion, he obviously saw something in the deal to push Arsenal on.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:28 pm 
A fat cheque is most definitely not his motive, climbing up another notch in the hirarchy might be a part of it but not the driving force. I believe the reason is much simpler: he got it wrong! That's it.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:45 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 10:37 am
Posts: 104
Location: arsenal forever!
arsenal don't need an american to make us a franchise...that's what glazers call man ure.

If Kroenke really loves the club he should start investing as a minor shareholder. Give a few millions for investing in promoting the club.
He will not do it. he is in it for the money.

We have the stadium, most of the squad , the manager, training ground, the fans

we are a great club mr kroenke...not ur cow to milk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:34 am 
I dont know if this has already been mentioned, but it wouldnt suprise me to see David Dein come back with Kroenke at his side. Dein was an entrepreneur, and alongside Wenger raised the club to the standard we are now. Maybe he realised that without the foreign funding available at clubs like Chelsea, Man Utd and Liverpool; Arsenal could fall further behind. Maybe tight fisted board members like Edelman and Hill-Wood didnt want to go and subsequently forced him off the board.

In answer to the poll, i think its a tricky one. No one wants to be another American Franchise but lets be honest, football is big business and if a take over is necessary for us to get the funds needed to do the business on the pitch, im all for it.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:25 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:46 am
Posts: 1579
Location: quietly pass me by.........
I do not believe that we need the takeover. I think that the current board together with David Dein and Arsene Wenger have put the club on a very stable road to financial soundness. I believe that the funds are available for Wenger should he want to purchase players this summer. I believe that he has almost as much as he wants and certainly as much as he needs. The only stumbling block may be the wages demanded by the superstars whose names appear in the wishlist threads.

BUT what we want or think is largely irrelevent and the world over too much time is spent talking aimlessly about the way things should be and not enough time is spent working with the way things are. There are some things that just are, it does not make them right or wrong but they will not change. eg. There will not be peace in the middle East in our lifetime. Live with it. I believe that Kroenke will launch a takeover, probably before next season. I believe he wil have Dein's backing. It may be a good thing, then again it may not. Either way we won't be able to stop it and in all probability neither will the Arsenal board. Live with it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:06 pm 
Offline
Acclaimed member

Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:10 pm
Posts: 3420
I vote no, for several reasons:

Quote:
After an initial investment . He is going to want £650M back plus any big initial transfer budget he will uses to sweetin the fans . The Man u transfer budget seems to have dropped and liverpools has stayed the same as it has been if reports are to be believed.


I agree with Speedy's comment. If he stumps up £650m that money goes to shareholders to buy out the existing shares. AFC see nothing of that. He will probably borrow or syndicate much of the money which means he is going to be looking for cash flow to pay off the debt or at least service the debt.

Arsenal will still have a large stadium debt to finance and I doubt he will be opening his wallet to go and buy X of the World's best players. He will be running this as an investment - he cares not a fig for the Arsenal.

Maybe the advent of Sonovavitch and the Glazers has changed football -although big TV money and the Champions League probably had a bigger effect in their day. But I do not want an Arsenal team populated by mercenaries on super salaries like at Chelsea or Real Madrid.

Arsene Wenger despite bringing in a lot of foreign players has still kept the traditions of the club alive - often because he brings in the foreigners so young they feel like Arsenal youth products.

Even if Kroenke was to open his wallet the first thing that would happen would be that all the current players would want big pay increases - this happened at Chelsea where Terry, Fatboy and Cole all got huge increases to stay!

The result of all this will be to kill the culture of the club, fill the club with mercenaries that follow the biggest paycheque and jumpship at the first opportunity. Maybe he will allow deficit spending (Chelski-esque salaries and transfers) and leave the club dangerously exposed to his future willingness to fund the club. Don't forget Leeds.

How long would he bear losses - not very I assume.

The best thing that could happen to the Club would be to pay off the stadium debt. AFC have been saddled by this debt mostly due to Labour politicians who tried to get the club to pay for the regeneration of the City and the chairpersons or local business or residents associations who tried to delay, derail or hold the project to ransom (most seemed to be lifelong Spurs supporters!). But Kroenke isn't going to do this.

I don't think Arsenal is in a crisis - the club has the best generation of youngsters ever, it is still in Europe, not too far off the top two (beat Man Utd home and away - almost became the first team to beat the Moron at Chelsea), Arsenal is not a 'selling club' where top talents are leaving because the wages are too low or the club's ambition too low.

The biggest threat to the club is Platini's plan to reduce England to 3 teams in the Champion's League and the EU plans to limit the number of non-English players!

So why risk everything on this? I agree with Corny's comments on Hill-Wood and you note that the revival of Arsenal began in 1983 with the arrival of DD.

But I think Arsenal will be fine if they could find a way to reduce this stadium debt. I could be accused of heresy but AFC should swallow its pride and sell half the ground to the Spurs. They could sell White Tart Lane to pay for that and both clubs would be better off.

Could that be done - why not. If Lazio and Roma, AC and Inter can share the same ground - despite real hatred - then why not the Gunners and the Spurs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:26 pm 
Offline
Managing Editor
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 7:46 pm
Posts: 12595
http://www.arsenalnewsreview.co.uk/inde ... eturnid=42

Some good replies to Myles' column from Arsenal News Review readers:

Dan

I can tell you the board's plans.

To run the club efficiently and keep debt at a managable level so that we remain a prosperous, solvent and well run business at the epoch of it's genre for today, tomorrow and future generations.

I can also tell you Kroenke's plans.

To buy Arsenal by borrowing the money from banks and hedge funds. Place that accrued debt on Arsenal's books and hope that the fans buy the club for you. Should a recession hit or football fall out of vogue or TV deals dry up, Arsenal will not be able to meet the potential £800 million liabilities they are responsible for. Kroenke will disappear, no worse off, back home and Arsenal will be broken up to pay back the lenders...


alex robson writes: I have been a season ticket holder for nearly 15 years and sit with a big crowd of people, none of whom support the "takeover".


David Wooster says:

Whilst I respect your writing and your site is one of the first I read when a new article is posted I have to disagree with you regarding the possible take over. Unless Kroenke intends to buy the club for cash and invest money into the club to develop it further I see no real benefit to him taking over Arsenal.

Historically we already know how tough it is to run the club if it is saddled with debt. This is what we have had to do to move to AB. It has restricted spending on players and instead Wenger had the foresight to plan for this and develop the youth system which is now producing players worth millions.

Kroenke goes the same route as United he will saddle the club with even greater debt and this can only have an impact on development. In essence it will be the fans that end up paying his debt off as they are at United. In fact there has been no sign of the huge sums of money that the Glazers are supposedly investing into the club.

The net return on player transactions is in fact positive rather than negative. Surely we should carry on with the staggering progress this club is making. We have moved into a new stadium with considerable debt and managed to stay a top four team, consistently getting to cup finals and with the potential over the next couple of years to have one of the most skillful and exciting teams in world football managed by an innovative and visionary manager.

Matthew Davis writes:

I can't agree.

I feel that the biggest issue for PHW and co is that Kroenke would not meet them first, set out his vision and reassure them that he is a worthy guardian for the club.

The likes of PHW see themselves not as owners, but as benefactors and governors - the type that need to look a man in the eye and know that he will act in the club's best interests.

I genuinely believe that PHW and co care more about the way business is done more than what business is done.

It is clear that DD has been seen to have broken their trust and that for the PHW generation is a cardinal sin. The PHW type may be very upstairs/downstairs, may well have a "father knows best" attitude, but they do have a strong moral compass.

(Incidently - I feel that many gooners like to know that this compass sits at the heart of the club; just read the complaints about Lehmann and Eboue when they act in a way that we are all uncomfortable with...)

In the clutter of PHW's inappropriate use of language I think that you have missed this point. PHW and co have to feel that they are handling this correctly.

It looks like DD thought he could buy-off/pension off the old school. He probably could have done had he tackled it their way.

Don't slate the board for clinging onto their principles. Look beneath the content of the PHW rehtoric - with the right handling, the right reassurances and the right approach, they will sell.

The Board are clearly just making sure that they buy the time, set out the rules and give themselves the chance to ensure that they get the possible buyer and best possible deal to safeguard the club. That's what boards are for and good on them for doing that....

John writes:

I have to say I beg to differ! Myles Palmer talking about a board that is backward minded and Dein being the only one with drive.... I beg your pardon, it was Dein who didn't want the new stadium and Fiszman and Edelman who pushed through with it.

The next fact you are conveniently not mentioning is that Man U is seriously debt ridden and that Glazer loaded the club with the cost of buying it. The point is what Hill-Wood said is that the board are not in it for the money, and that is how it should be. If Kroenke took over he would be in it solely for the money - there won't be major investments as there are no major investments at Man U, he will take money out of the club.

And what's worse is that Arsenal would be a "franchise", sorry I love this club and not the brand or franchise etc. The next point is that Arsene Wenger has had the success he had without being able to compete with Man U on the financial side - and he is building a new team at the moment which will win us titles again without "big" bucks. It is a matter of fact that no team in the world can keep on winning everything all the time - so we've had to painful seasons that doesn't mean we won't have glory days soon again.

As a matter of fact it has nothing to do with being left behind because all clubs will be owned by investors, maybe the secret for the future is not having some profit chasing investor running the club.

A little plea for a bit more objectivety and taking all facts into account and not jumping the gun.

Brendan Melck:

I think Myles is very trusting of the 'good' Americans, perhaps too trusting. While I agree wholeheartedly with his comments about Peter Hill-Wood's snobbish remarks about not wanting 'their sort' over here, I think he should probably avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The reason is that I can't see how a new owner is going to help Arsenal particularly right now. Kroenke would need to raise capital to make the bid, and would hardly be in generous mood when it comes to transfers. With the takeover at Manchester United so recent, it's too early to decide whether it has been of benefit to the club. There have been few big signings at United since they arrived. Time will tell how generous they really are. The same is true for Liverpool. They are going to build a stadium, and will have to borrow for that too.

It is easy to say "sell! sell!" because you think things are bad, but now is the time to step back and really take stock of things, an perhaps realise that making the club vulnerable to the fluctuations of global investors' fancy could be unwise in the long-term - despite our very real frustrations.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 7:49 pm 
Think for a moment why we despise clubs like Chelscum - a team with virtually no history and suddenly after Comrade Moneybucks buys it up, the team is now in line to win 4 trophies. Convinced that a manager who has zillions in cash dropped into his lap will make the difference more than the superstars that they just HAVE to get. Put this along the same lines as Man Utd, minus the manager bit. Pink Floyd had it right when they sang about what money can do. Now, imagine Arsenal doing the same thing. Sorry, the Arsenal way - Wenger knows, youth is key, etc. - I love it all to the end, but it's not going to work the way you want it to. I'm American and I want to tell this wanker from Colorado to f-off. He doesn't give a rat's ass for the game, the supporters or the passion and love for the sport. He wants to make a quick and big buck. Yes, soccer as we call it is gaining popularity here, but it will never pass up American football, basketball or baseball. Just imagine Arsenal being despised like the Scum and Stamford Shite - "I want him, him, him, him and him". I don't want that to happen to us.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:18 pm 
I voted yes. It is inevitable that we will be bought at some point and I quite like the sound of Kroenke.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:21 pm 
Offline
Marketing & Enhancement
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:21 pm
Posts: 11788
Location: Formerly SloppyGooner
Karuda wrote:
I voted yes. It is inevitable that we will be bought at some point and I quite like the sound of Kroenke.


Why?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1118 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 75  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron