Clichy has left. And Nasri in talks with Citeh.

[Olivier's xmas twist]

That's a nonsense reply, I already said I don't expect us to sign superstars.....and yes we could sign some quality players and afford their wages if we wanted to, even if we didn't shed the cr*p we overpay in the current squad.

As for your last comment you sound like Wenger, get a grip........if not for Wenger we'd probably see some better players coming in......so Wenger being here is very relevant to our situation.

I agree and apologise if i said anything that was rude, just depressed and frustated with the whole ting tbh.

I was not defending AW or the board just stating we can'g afford wages like others which can defer players thats all.

[Niall_Quinn]

No, he did however offer to take over stadium debt and let the club use more money on transfer market.

The wolf dressed up as granny too. The guy's bad news, nothing good long term can come from letting a gangster take control of the club even if he is willing to pour his laundered cash into transfers. There's a limit to what's acceptable surely? Stan might be a useless fuck but at least he's legit.

[milla]

The wolf dressed up as granny too. The guy's bad news, nothing good long term can come from letting a gangster take control of the club even if he is willing to pour his laundered cash into transfers. There's a limit to what's acceptable surely? Stan might be a useless fuck but at least he's legit.

No different from any capitalist business man in our board (current and previous). If his name was John, Jack or Dick, no one would say a word about him.

[Coney]

No, he did however offer to take over stadium debt and let the club use more money on transfer market.

I find the idea that a guy comes in from nowhere and is suddenly such a committed Arsenal fan that he will take over tens of millions of debt just so we can win a few matches. Now for some reason, I think he has an ulterior motive. Can't quite put my finger on it though.

[Niall_Quinn]

No different from any capitalist business man in our board (current and previous). If his name was John, Jack or Dick, no one would say a word about him.

I see what you are saying and agree, it's a question of degrees. But if this guy really loved the club and wanted to see it succeed at all costs - wouldn't he just dump the money in anyway, as a gesture of that love? He wants control first, which means he has a commercial interest which is of course fair enough and expected. So I take his expressions of love and shit on them, in much the same way as I shit on every word uttered by our foul board. The trouble I have with Usmanov is in the past he's shown a willingness to stop at nothing, murder, corruption, theft, to achieve his goals. I know most big businessmen are crooked shits in reality, robbing from the poor to feed the rich, but most stick within the (rigged) law and so wouldn't be likely to get the club in too much hot water with their antics, other than maybe a slip down the league. Look at the conman Harry Redknapp, he's small time compared to Usmanov. I dread to think what might come out of the woodwork a couple of years after a Usmanov takeover, stuff that would have the potential to destroy the club entirely. He's too big a risk, I'm surprised he was even allowed to buy his current stake. mind you, it seems the authorities really could give a fuck who gets involved in football provided the money is pouring in. In fact FIFA might even approve and feel more comfortable if we had a gangster running the show - who knows?

[budesonide]

I see what you are saying and agree, it's a question of degrees. But if this guy really loved the club and wanted to see it succeed at all costs - wouldn't he just dump the money in anyway, as a gesture of that love? He wants control first, which means he has a commercial interest which is of course fair enough and expected. So I take his expressions of love and shit on them, in much the same way as I shit on every word uttered by our foul board. The trouble I have with Usmanov is in the past he's shown a willingness to stop at nothing, murder, corruption, theft, to achieve his goals. I know most big businessmen are crooked shits in reality, robbing from the poor to feed the rich, but most stick within the (rigged) law and so wouldn't be likely to get the club in too much hot water with their antics, other than maybe a slip down the league. Look at the conman Harry Redknapp, he's small time compared to Usmanov. I dread to think what might come out of the woodwork a couple of years after a Usmanov takeover, stuff that would have the potential to destroy the club entirely. He's too big a risk, I'm surprised he was even allowed to buy his current stake. mind you, it seems the authorities really could give a fuck who gets involved in football provided the money is pouring in. In fact FIFA might even approve and feel more comfortable if we had a gangster running the show - who knows?

He can't just get up and do that though, could he? He hasn't yet got a controlling share has he? And, we don't know how he is perceived by the rest of the board. We all know the initial reception kroenke got from the board -- until for whatever reason they decided it was okay to go into bed with him.

The club is not a charity -- so even if I was that rich and could pump money into it, I would at least make sure I was in a position to exert some influence on proceedings at said club. Everyone else on the current board would do exactly the same thing.

[IBK]

Its a very different proposition saying you'll do this and that from the outside - particularly when you want to improve your PR - and doing it. For those who need reminding, I give you Messr's Hicks and Gillette; Thaksin Shinawatra and Alexandre Gaydamak.

[milla]

I find the idea that a guy comes in from nowhere and is suddenly such a committed Arsenal fan that he will take over tens of millions of debt just so we can win a few matches. Now for some reason, I think he has an ulterior motive. Can't quite put my finger on it though.

Come on Coney, this is not a big world. He would probably has supported Arsenal for half of his life.

It's like when you first met your missus years ago, love at first sight, "I'll do anything to bang you for you"

[milla]

I see what you are saying and agree, it's a question of degrees. But if this guy really loved the club and wanted to see it succeed at all costs - wouldn't he just dump the money in anyway, as a gesture of that love? He wants control first, which means he has a commercial interest which is of course fair enough and expected. So I take his expressions of love and shit on them, in much the same way as I shit on every word uttered by our foul board. The trouble I have with Usmanov is in the past he's shown a willingness to stop at nothing, murder, corruption, theft, to achieve his goals. I know most big businessmen are crooked shits in reality, robbing from the poor to feed the rich, but most stick within the (rigged) law and so wouldn't be likely to get the club in too much hot water with their antics, other than maybe a slip down the league. Look at the conman Harry Redknapp, he's small time compared to Usmanov. I dread to think what might come out of the woodwork a couple of years after a Usmanov takeover, stuff that would have the potential to destroy the club entirely. He's too big a risk, I'm surprised he was even allowed to buy his current stake. mind you, it seems the authorities really could give a fuck who gets involved in football provided the money is pouring in. In fact FIFA might even approve and feel more comfortable if we had a gangster running the show - who knows?

That's utter politic bullshit IMO, why should we worried about what's so far from us when we cant stop our own government from killing innocent people? For all weknow Usmanov is probably just as innocent as our leaders at Downing Street. I don't understand, what would destroy the club? and why would Usmanov destroy the club?

In my eye, it is clear Kroenke look at Arsenal as an investment to make money, but Usmanov seems to look at the club on personal level (sure he is business man). He has his box years before he bought the shares from DD, the same cant be said about Kroenke.

God forbid but if the club goes bankrupt, there will be dozens of suitor who will offer to buy out the debts but right now we need a very strong (financialy) and committed owner. Club cant afford changing owner every few years ala Liverpool. Kroenke is not rich enough and when the time is right he will sell his share for a good profit (like he did in US). That is why I am so hell bent on having Usmanov (or arab investor), they are so rich, what ever happen, they will pour more money into the club.

[Xhaka Can’t]

That's utter politic bullshit IMO, why should we worried about what's so far from us when we cant stop our own government from killing innocent people? For all weknow Usmanov is probably just as innocent as our leaders at Downing Street. I don't understand, what would destroy the club? and why would Usmanov destroy the club?

In my eye, it is clear Kroenke look at Arsenal as an investment to make money, but Usmanov seems to look at the club on personal level (sure he is business man). He has his box years before he bought the shares from DD, the same cant be said about Kroenke.

God forbid but if the club goes bankrupt, there will be dozens of suitor who will offer to buy out the debts but right now we need a very strong (financialy) and committed owner. Club cant afford changing owner every few years ala Liverpool. Kroenke is not rich enough and when the time is right he will sell his share for a good profit (like he did in US). That is why I am so hell bent on having Usmanov (or arab investor), they are so rich, what ever happen, they will pour more money into the club.

You have just reduced football to supporting the guy with the biggest wallet.

That is fucking sad.