Comments on: Something rotten in the state of Arsenal

By: walter

walter — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:41:38 +0000

We have to keep it a multiple shareholders club as long as possible.
If Usmanov wants to give 100 million to the Arsenal he can buy an advertising board somewhere in the stadium. Maybe above all toilets or in the toilets….

By: eduardo

eduardo — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:42:17 +0000

my information is that Stan Kroenke has no intention of making a full blown buyout attempt for the forseeable future(a statement to this effect will be made at the AGM next week – the board will once again pledge to keep the club in multiple shareholders hands and oppose any takeover for at least another year), and will in fact only do so if Usmanov or someone else makes one, then the board would favour SK and advise shareholders to accept his bid over Usmanov’s. The main reason for SK buying up to 29.9% of shares is so to make sure to be in a position to stop usmanov even if he gets hold of more than 30% of shares and launches a takeover bid.
People seem to be under the misconception that if Stan or Usmanov launch a bid that is has to go through. In fact 30% only means they are obliged to bid for a full buyout now or have to wait a year to bid and anybid can be turned down by the shareholders. Only way a full buyout can be forced through is if a shareholder gets 50.1% of shares and they also need something like 80% of shares to then make a compulsory buyout of all 100% of shares.
The board have something like 45% of shares and they also say they have more than 5% also willing to back them and this is not including AISA and ASSA and others who totally are opposed to a buyout and would fight a takeover by anyone including memeber of the present board.

By: pig

pig — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:12:25 +0000

i tend to agree with your idea that stan didnt have enough loose cash to buy in full, and not wanting to liquidate assets in a depressed market, bought the shares on the long finger.

this is not to say that if he is forced by jabba the hut to make a pre-emptive takeover bid, he would do a glazer. i firmly believe that being realists, the board have discussed the method of any takeover bid with stan and assured themselves that he is fully committed to arsenal.

lets face it, he is the only parachute the board and arsenal have, to escape from the unthinkable.

By: Old Gooner

Old Gooner — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:48:35 +0000

I thought as much, it sounds like he must be related to the Glaziers.

Borrow the money and put the debt on the club.

Bring on the Fat Russian !

By: LRV

LRV — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:55:52 +0000

I sure hope to God that Davy D no-longer has no hand in this mess. It will be very sad for him to loose all the shreds of affection and respect that Arsenal fans have for him; that will be sad indeed.

By: Brickfields Gunners

Brickfields Gunners — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 04:30:38 +0000

Like most I too hope that the status quo remains.Let the agrieved party rant and rave about the treatment meted out to them ,but hopefully they will place Arsenal FC first before any ideas of revenge or sabotage .
RK seems to be a better choice than Usmanov.

By: Consolsbob

Consolsbob — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:16:48 +0000

Fat and Orange, fat and orange. Beware.

By: don't believe the hype

don't believe the hype — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:58:10 +0000

There may well be some truth in this story, because I remember at the time DF sold his shares to SK there was actually something published on Arsenal.com about the deal, which indicated that there was a planned delay in the payment. I suspect that the transfer of shares was prompted by the need to strengthen the position of a powerful ally who would be in a better position to fight off the unfavoured opposition should that time arise.

By: LRV

LRV — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:14:10 +0000

Tony, I must admit one prayer tops my prayer list daily (it’s an almost empty list really); that is to not see a takeover at Arsenal. The whole business smacks of a game to me; two opposing sides at the boardroom trying to gain an upper hand by dooing deals. Besides, it is another reason for me to hate Usmanonsense. I believe that had he kept his grubby, hairy hands to himself, none of these would have happened.

By: walter

walter — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:09:02 +0000

Flint, you mention the thing I also fear have and the hope I carry.

By: walter

walter — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:05:06 +0000

Gutter press or not but there certainly is some ‘argueing” going on in the board. The thing with the lady in the board, remember. This is a “fact” which we can not forget, unfortunatly I would say.
So we must live with it that the board, as so many boardrooms of football clubs, is a bit of a snake pit.
So when there is smoke, there is a fire. Off course it could wel be that the smoke comes from a boardroom member who likes to smoke big cigars…

By: Flint McCullough

Flint McCullough — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:00:32 +0000

You have become essential reading, on all matters Arsenal & football, but especially on the financial matters combined with intrigue of the press.

If the story is true, I would imagine that the current situation is by arrangement.

The worry should it be true is , of course, that a Kroenke takeover would be financed in the Glazier fashion.

Let’s hope that the status quo can be maintained for as long as possible with the club under multiple ownership.

By: Consolsbob

Consolsbob — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:52:38 +0000

There is a reason why treachery is seen as a heinous act and traitors are always abhorred. I believe that it remains the only crime that still carris the death penalty in the UK.

Hubris is the usual reson for Empires crumbling.

By: TheSKAGooner

TheSKAGooner — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:46:02 +0000

A supremely rational read on the situation, Tony. As usual.

Were I King of England, which admittedly would be an odd thing considering my family is from Armagh and Krakow, but were I King, instead of handing out KBE’s for good and heroic deeds I would rather publish an annual list of AAH’ers. These would be “awarded” to the worst Anti-Arsenal Hacks in journalism. I think the Times and Antony Kastrinakis at The Sun would be tops of the first list for generally horrendous hackery.

By: walter

walter — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:04:40 +0000

Good article Tony.
In an ideal world (yeah I still dream about it sometimes….a bit foolish aint it?)people in or around the board should all work together in the best intrest of the club.
Helas, put 2 human beings in one room and you got the start of a dispute. So rich people are no better then people who don’t have money, one could say. Maybe worse ?
In a way it makes me sad to know that not everyone at the top (or near the top) is working for the best of the club.
One can only hope that they not damage our club in the long run just for their personal ambitions.
Who is the good guy, who is the bad guy? Well I actually don’t know. I can not know what the real intentions are of those people. As a fan I have my thoughts on this and I would just ask those guys to settle and arrange what ever bussines they have and think about the best for ours and their club.
Like Tony said at the end, just at the moment the team is really on the edge of great things, we (the fans) and the players can do without these boardroom back stabbers.
Would it help if we kicked some asses ???