I voted no quite simply because I would not like to see the club in the hands of another foreign owner whom the media can pick at and add to their list of "clubs under new management". Especially as yet, we have no idea where his loyalties lie? Is this just another plaything for him? He already owns two other sporting teams in the US, what good is adding a third one going to do for us? Give us more money? Allow us to hike up the money we pay hence plunging us into great debt a la Mr. Glazier so soon after moving to the Emirates?!

We'd end up paying upwards of £40m+ to even come close to what Abramovich can offer for sometimes overrated players who are NOT worth that sort of price (Henry the exception), just to beat the likes of Chelsea and Liverpool (though not sure how much they'd have in a bidding war with Chelsea) in a bidding war for Villa and Torres and anyone else you could name.

Do we really want to join the others under the hands of someone who hasn't grown up with the team and seen them develop into a major force in England and, last season, Europe?

I'm not really sure where I stand on this one, I'm not too fond of the thought of a US investor being the man in control of our club especially not knowing his intentions for the club but on the alternative David Dein appears to be in favour of the move, I've never seen DD make a particularly bad choice in terms for Arsenal, the appointment of Arsene Wenger and the move to the Emirates are prime examples of the good he has done. I'm going to maintain my position on the fence until I know the intentions, He has to have something good to have the support of DD

Wrighty185 - I'm afraid you're wrong about Dein and the Emirates. He didn't like it and probably still doesn't. He did NOT give us the Emirates!

I voted no as well. There are a couple of reasons for that:

a) Kroenke is not even remotedly in the same financial league as Abramovich. In fact if you look at the valuation of the club (£600-£700 million), and the £1 billion he is supposedly worth (Forbes), it suggests there will be limited funds for players. Unless he saddles the club with debts from the takeover of course.

b) The current board has no interest in taking money out of the club. To my knowledge there have been no dividend to speak of to the shareholders in recent years. Kroenke on the other hands views the club as an investment opportunity. Normally one likes to make money out of one's investments.

c) The club's long-term financial prospects are very good and very sound. With a board that sees the success of the club on the playing field as paramount, I would expect the funds generated within the club to spent on players. With an owner that does not have the bonds to the club and its history you have no guarantee that the funds will spent on the club.

I think we are better off in the long term with the current board. That does not mean that Kroenke could not play a positive role as a part-owner of the club however.

TaddyPorter - basically correct, except for the numbers. Kroenke's worth according to Forbes is 2,1 billion. You may call that symantics and it probably is. Anyway, the fact remains that the number of people someone could compare with Abramovich can be counted on one hand, and neither Kroenke nor Gillete, Hicks, Glazer or the others are even remotely there. To put that into perspective (it's just so bloody difficult to imagine those riches): Roman currently holds number 16 with an estimated wealth of 18,7 billion dollars. The number one since 13 years, Bill Gates, stands at a staggering 56 billion, his associate Buffett stands at 52. Would Abramovich 'buy' Glazer, Kroenke, Gillete and Hicks he would STILL be in the top 30!!!!!!! Back to Kroenke: most of his wealth are assets so he would have to buy the Arsenal on credit like I bought my last car. In my book that's hardly someone able to put noticable amount of money into the club!

Arsenal chairman to meet Kroenke
bbc.co.uk

Arsenal chairman Peter Hill-Wood will meet Stan Kroenke to "hear what he has to say" amid reports the American is preparing a hostile takeover bid. Kroenke recently increased his stake in the Gunners to 12.19% and is understood to be the main reason behind the exit of former vice-chairman David Dein. Hill-Wood recently said of the American billionaire "we do not want his sort". But Hill-Wood now admits he has "spoken to him recently to arrange a meeting so that I can hear what he has to say." The move represents a change of heart for Hill-Wood who recently claimed Kroenke knew "nothing about our football". The letter to the shareholders added: "Our managing director, Keith Edelman, has already had one meeting with Mr Kroenke since his investment. His recent acquisition of shares has caused a great deal of media speculation and the board felt that the time is right to reassure you about the future of our club."

Hill-Wood's letter expresses his doubt about a new owner buying the club in order to profit from it but reassures supporters that manager Arsene Wenger remains part of the club's long-term future. "Our approach, which is very much in line with (manager) Arsene Wenger's, is that the funds generated from ticket sales, broadcasting revenue and the like should be made available for investment in players and that this is the most sustainable way to ensure the club's long-term growth and future." Kroenke Sports Enterprises held a 11.26% stake, mainly as a result of buying 9.9% of the club from ITV. But he raised his stake days after "irreconcilable differences" between Dein and the Arsenal board prompted Dein to leave the club. If Kroenke, who owns the Colorado Rapids Major League Soccer club, raises his Arsenal stake to 30% he is obliged by takeover rules to launch a formal bid for the Gunners.

2.1 billion dollars, which is roughly £1 billion these days, which was the currency I was using above

Im not worried by this suggestion that kroenke is going to plunge arsenal into debt because i heard his wife (Walmart heiress) is the backup plan on a lot of his deals

okay let me reiterate, my understanding of it could be wrong. his personal fortune is $2.1 billion. since he married his wife he has done a lot opening walmarts and other stores (property tycoon) with his wife, he has a joint fortune with her which is not included in his estimated personal value.

also when these deals are brokered if his wife is the insurance policy im sure she has contractually agree to be able to say she would pay the debts a lot like arsenals current debt where if we cant pay the repayments the banks are allowed to seize arsenal theoritacally if his debts can't be handled and his wife has signed to pay off his debts she has to pay them regardless of whether divorce

I think (but hope we'll never have to find out) that the assets of Arsenal would be Kroenke's insurance against non-payments of debts he incurs if he buys up the club. Why put his wife's fortunes on the line? He loves her, not the London Arsenals.

Hill-Wood to meet Kroenke

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=467896

Arsenal chairman Peter Hill-Wood has revealed he is looking forward to meeting Stan Kroenke. Hill-Wood has yet to hold talks with the American businessman, who has been linked with a takeover of Arsenal after acquiring a 12 per cent stake in the club. The Gunners chief has previously made it clear that Kroenke's interest was unwanted, saying 'we don't need his money and we don't want his sort'. However, Hill-Wood's stance now appears to be softening as he is aiming to get together with Kroenke before too long. "I am hoping to meet him in the next two or three weeks," he told the Daily Star. "I'm looking forward to meeting him to hear what he's got to say, but we are quite confident we are in good shape the way we are."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters ... senal.html

I particularly found it interesting what the comments were at the bottom of this article...

Is it really inevitable that Mr. Kroenke will flex financial muscle to convince the board it's in their best interest? Not sure about that one...

Those who think Kroenke will come into this club and go on an Abramovich like spending spree are gravely mistaken. Just becuase he is a billionaire do not think for one minute he will come in here and splash 200 million on new players. Having lots of money does not guarentee success, look at Portsmouth, Aston Villa, West Ham etc and look at the quality of player they have signed. They have signed average / decent players at high prices / on high wages yet still their teams don't daunt me in the slightest.

This guy has money to invest but at the end of the day, there is not a lot else that the current board has done what other potential new owners could do to make themselves more money e.g. Stadium sponsership and big shirt deals are already done and in place.

I feel we really do not need his input at all. He will be no different to what we currently have for a board as he will have the same ambition to have the club running on its own resources like Hll-Wood and co do now. And more importantly, he is not a supporter of the club and seems to know sod all about the actual football club itself, and that may not matter to the success-now supporters but it creates an unstable feeling in my mind that at any given opportunity, this guy will sell to the highest bidder in order to make a profit a few years down the track.

Looks like a load of rehashed quotes to me.

Where is it going to stop though? You get these investors that try and muscle in on foreign sports territory just so that they can say, "I've got a piece of so-and-so". It really bugs me when this happens, because a lot of the time, fans (not the real ones mind) think "Great! A transfer kitty to get the best players!" like it's nothing to be ashamed of instead of recognising that if it goes the way of foreigners who probably have no idea on the heritage and history of the club... then who knows what sort of a club you could be supporting in five/ten years time.

Let's hope he keeps his nose out, eh?