Was losing Dein the problem?

[Joker]

Dunno. Let me think it through.

The schism between Dein and PHW/Fiszmann (hereafter PhiszWood) was down to the direction of the club. Although both parties agreed on the need to increase gates, they disagreed on how. The Phwisz felt we needed to own our own stadium, taking a tradionalist's view that Arsenal Football Club needed it's own place. Dein, being a fan first and foremost, felt we needed to win, and that building our own stadium would impact too heavily on funds for the team, hence the plan to rent Wembley.

When Dein approached Kroenke with a view to securing that investment, behind the backs of the board, it eventually led to his demise. More than likely Dein saw Kroenke as a means of eventually ousting PHW, the speed and brutality of his sacking suggests PHW saw this too.

The only scenario in which Dein stays is if PHW gets dethroned. By the time he was sacked in 2007, it would have already been too late for his Wembley rental plan, and we would have already have been well into our front-loaded but ultimately sapping commercial deals.

Materially we would have been in a similar position to now, except with a different chairman, and no Usmanov.

Where I think Dein would have differed is threefold.

1) He would have retained the relationship with the manager, I think his influence in this regard may be overstated, however sometimes even small things can have a large effect. He would at least be some kind of sounding board, if not a full-blown check and balance.
2) He was a schmoozer, he had a presence in UEFA, the FA, the G14 and his business nous in transfer negotiations was a major asset to the club.
3) He would have persued funding for the team far more aggressively than the current incumbent. The team, is after all, all Dein really cared about. It's here though, that his judgement has to be in question, his schmoozing may well have brought him into less savoury company. His association with Usmanov may have been born of desparation, but by bringing someone of such highly questionable morals into the club, he may ultimately have done more harm than good.

To sum up:
Old Guard, Old Money, Conservative, Risk Averse, Self-Sufficient.
VS
New Money, Risk Heavy, Winning.

Out of those I'd choose new money everytime.

[Niall_Quinn]

To sum up:
Old Guard, Old Money, Conservative, Risk Averse, Self-Sufficient.
VS
New Money, Risk Heavy, Winning.

More a case of:
Fucking slimy cockroach rat bastard bunch of ****s
vs
Fucking slimy cockroach rat bastard bunch of ****s

Hard to choose between them really.

[Niall_Quinn]

Out of those I'd choose new money everytime.

That's because you are an economic fundamentalist posing as a champagne socialist.

[Olivier's xmas twist]

More a case of:
Fucking slimy cockroach rat bastard bunch of ****s
vs
Fucking slimy cockroach rat bastard bunch of ****s

Hard to choose between them really.

Rat bastard

ain't heard that one in along time.

[Power n Glory]

If PHW left maybe there would be a way back in for Dein. He introduced both Stan and Usmanov.

[Niall_Quinn]

If PHW left maybe there would be a way back in for Dein. He introduced both Stan and Usmanov.

Maybe. Then he could introduce Putin.

[Joker]

That's because you are an economic fundamentalist posing as a champagne socialist.

Champagne socialist

[Niall_Quinn]

Champagne socialist

That's you, that is.

[IBK]

Dunno. Let me think it through.

The schism between Dein and PHW/Fiszmann (hereafter PhiszWood) was down to the direction of the club. Although both parties agreed on the need to increase gates, they disagreed on how. The Phwisz felt we needed to own our own stadium, taking a tradionalist's view that Arsenal Football Club needed it's own place. Dein, being a fan first and foremost, felt we needed to win, and that building our own stadium would impact too heavily on funds for the team, hence the plan to rent Wembley.

When Dein approached Kroenke with a view to securing that investment, behind the backs of the board, it eventually led to his demise. More than likely Dein saw Kroenke as a means of eventually ousting PHW, the speed and brutality of his sacking suggests PHW saw this too.

The only scenario in which Dein stays is if PHW gets dethroned. By the time he was sacked in 2007, it would have already been too late for his Wembley rental plan, and we would have already have been well into our front-loaded but ultimately sapping commercial deals.

Materially we would have been in a similar position to now, except with a different chairman, and no Usmanov.

Where I think Dein would have differed is threefold.

1) He would have retained the relationship with the manager, I think his influence in this regard may be overstated, however sometimes even small things can have a large effect. He would at least be some kind of sounding board, if not a full-blown check and balance.
2) He was a schmoozer, he had a presence in UEFA, the FA, the G14 and his business nous in transfer negotiations was a major asset to the club.
3) He would have persued funding for the team far more aggressively than the current incumbent. The team, is after all, all Dein really cared about. It's here though, that his judgement has to be in question, his schmoozing may well have brought him into less savoury company. His association with Usmanov may have been born of desparation, but by bringing someone of such highly questionable morals into the club, he may ultimately have done more harm than good.

To sum up:
Old Guard, Old Money, Conservative, Risk Averse, Self-Sufficient.
VS
New Money, Risk Heavy, Winning.

I thought that it was evenly balanced. But my issue is that when it comes to replacing AW, I would trust DD. I would not trust anyone presently at the club.

[Olivier's xmas twist]

That's you, that is.

Disgusting the way Joker is treated on here.