I still think its pretty scandelous that Usmanov isnt on the board tbh.
He is the second largest shareholder and has absolutely no say whatsoever.
Printable View
I still think its pretty scandelous that Usmanov isnt on the board tbh.
He is the second largest shareholder and has absolutely no say whatsoever.
He isn't wanted by any of the other shareholders, they have always made that clear. So if he doesn't like that, he can always sell up and fuck off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Save me Jeebus!
Ok, but why?Quote:
Originally Posted by GB.
Why is there any need for that stance/attitude towards him?
There is nothing really concrete about him, its all rumour, speculation and accusations.
Or do the board not want him there because he wants them to spend some money?
they can't stop dicks like dein selling out to him but they can keep as much distance as possible from these sort of allegations
http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2007...an-parliament/
the board do not take money out of the club through dividends as he wants and it would be stupid to risk getting caught up with the mess he could bring.
You would assume the board performed due dilligence, and really didn't like what they found.Quote:
Originally Posted by Save me Jeebus!
First do some reading around, then decide whether you'd feel safe bending over in front of this man.
Not sure giving him a place on the board would be equivalent to 'bending over in front of' him.
Wouldn't want him in charge but don't see anything wrong with him getting a place on the board.
The fact that Usmanov is saying what just about every man and his dog are does not mean that this is not some cynical PR exercise by him.
It's funny how some seem to deny the obvious, that the board have made great personal gains from this policy (and they have, even if they don't get dividends then by share price alone), the lack of investment means they minimise the risk...if they truly wanted us to be successful on the football side they wouldn't have allowed the current policy to have lasted 6 years.
All we hear about is how the club is doing well financially, how share price is high, how 4th place is like a trophy and a wonderful achievement...stuff the fans don't really give a damn about or at least see as secondary to the on the pitch action.
More accusations, nothing fact at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz
Exactly, Usmanov is supposed to be the bad guy, and yet the board are virtually doing what people accuse him of wanting to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsMe
Also, to the op, I found this comment from an article that Nasri Scroreng posted a link to:
Quote:
Those who continue to laughably claim that Wenger lacks the funds to compete with Man United, could look to the confirmation from Jones’ agent that Arsenal offered higher wages than Man United, and a slightly higher transfer fee also. Ye were saying?
Yes - and that it what's worrying me. It used to be that we missed out in the trasfer market by refusing to spend. Now it looks like we are missing out because our star is, frankly, waning.
Exactly right. The board is full of Old Etonian Conservatives who know the price of everything but the value of nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsMe
Usmanov may be a Uzbek Gangster/Warlord but he is very successful and if he ordered Russia to invade Georgia man that was a BOSS move...
and if you run a business you would be wise to steer clear of anything to do with someone who that lingering over them - im sure they have done their background researchQuote:
Originally Posted by Save me Jeebus!
can you explain how the have as I didn't know about thatQuote:
Originally Posted by ItsMe
I was referring to Usmanov's comments, but what's clear is that by not spending profits and being profitable they directly benefitting from increased share price. This means that whenever they choose to sell their shares they make a large amount of money, regardless of anything they may or may not get.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz
We dont need a sugar dady to compete, we already do compete. We just dont win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss
It was a metaphor for trust.
I wasn't suggesting you actually bend over in front of him. He'd probably shag you then eat you.
this week usmanov echoes fan criticisms of the board
last week he wanted arsenal to hire his boy the uzbeki national captain.
being a sugar daddy's plaything has its downsides too you know.
Totally agree. Does anyone think that Chelsea wanted to buy Shevchenko?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan B'stard
Abrahmovich is chelsea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toronto Gooner
:unsure:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKBapologist
:haha:
Or that Ancelotti wanted to play Torres? :sarcy:Quote:
Originally Posted by Toronto Gooner
or to lose ray wilkins shouting 'stay on your facking feet lads'Quote:
Originally Posted by Toronto Gooner
As long as Kroenke doesn't make us buy Americans we'll be fine. :good:
Bulldozer :bow:
Like Freddie Adu?:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fist of Lehmann
exactly, he's shit
Freddy Adu. :lol:
I remember him.
Quality on FM though.
The old FMs that is.
On FM 05 I always used to poach him before he signed professional terms. He turned into an absolute beast when he hit 18. :bow:
We all did that i reckon. The new ones are shit tbh. That may be down to Arsenal being shit thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,195...998258,00.htmlQuote:
Alisher Usmanov has further increased his stake in Premier League giants Arsenal.
http://img.skysports.com/10/12/218x2...ov_2543492.jpgUsmanov: Looking to increase his influence at Arsenal
The Russian billionaire is looking to increase his influence at Arsenalhttp://static.lingospot.com/spot/image/spacer.gif in the face of a takeover by rival investor Stan Kroenke.http://static.lingospot.com/spot/image/spacer.gif
Usmanov's Red & White vehicle, which he jointly owns along with business associate Farhad Moshiri, revealed it had raised its holding to more than 29 per cent.
Kroenke agreed a deal with Arsenal's main shareholders in April and executive management to take over the club and acquire a majority shareholding in Arsenal.
He now controls 67 per cent of the shares in the Gunners.
Lets face it, he is the only chance we will ever get at having a 'sugar daddy'
He is rich enough. :good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Save me Jeebus!
From LegroveQuote:
Tim Payton also made some interesting comments in the article as well, basically stating the self sustaining business model has made us uncompetitive with transfers and wages… he says,
Bravo to that comment. Self sustaining for me is code for, ‘we stick it to the fans’. Too many people seem to have the idea that self sustaining is like solar panels for our clubs bank account. That money comes from us paying over the odds for tickets. I have no worries about a Billionaire taking over the club and running it their way. What would be the difference bar maybe less of a drive to squeeze every penny out of us? You know, and perhaps a shift in focus from the balance sheet to the starting 11?Quote:
‘It doesn’t seem right that fans are asked to dig ever deeper when we have two billionaires owning 95% of the club'
http://le-grove.co.uk/2011/07/03/sam...lf-sustaining/
Could anyone do a copy and paste job on the times article?
wrong forum