Alisher Usmanov

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

WOW! 39 pages.

 

[Azza]

WOW! 39 pages.

40 now because of you!!!! FFS!

 

[Bullet]

So a guestimate on timeline would be later this year to early next - maybe stretching till the summer before it falls into place.

Seems a perfectly reasonable timescale. I guess we'll know the truth by this time next year. Whatever it is our future is certainly looking a whole lot brighter than it was only a few months ago.

 

[bluestevon]

A compelling argument. I've always believed it's probable and the mooted £100m budget reinforced this as it did not tally with Moshiri's wealth level. Unfortunately the £100m hasn't materialised.
What timescale do you envisage? I don't see Usmanov overlapping with BK so if it happens I think it'll be after the exercising of the option to increase shares to circa 75% and this may be dependent on progress with the stadium.
Based upon the aspirations for Arsenal set down in their famous open letter what do you envisage a Moshiri / Usmanov partnership would mean at EFC?

Share buyout will 100% happen first, new stadium site will be 100% signed and sealed also, Usmanov won't take any even slight risk of leaving one mess to join another, Moshiri will have to have sorted both things out, then it's a simple matter of sell at Arsenal and buying into Blue Heaven holdings as an equal partner.

So a guestimate on timeline would be later this year to early next - maybe stretching till the summer before it falls into place.

What would a partnership mean, foremost i think it would give us not only the vision of joining the 'elite' but also the financial means to do so - on a timescale that with just Moshiri would be totally impossible, Moshiri alone can turn us into a very well ran club, can sort out the club from top to bottom, can have us competing on the pitch and financially at a level we couldn only have dreamed about a couple of years back, but theres a ceiling on that - we can reach the spurs level but to go above that - the gulf is so huge that it would take a generation or more and would need success throughout that generation on the pitch - all the whilst having 3 clubs who financially can at the flcik of a switch decide to blow the competition out the water (thats assuming nothing major happens involving Liverpool, West Ham or Spurs as well - as all 3 of those are in a situation that a takeover from an Oligarch, Sheikh or Chinese consortium would see them joining the likes of City, chelsea and United as almost untouchable to us - even with Moshiri at the helm)

In simplest terms, the club 'should' be debt free (already apparently is according to some), a new stadium that would match or eclipse those of the biggest clubs in the coountry would be in place (a riverside one would do that - and apparently is also no longer a pipe dream) - with none of that cost being past onto the club as debt, the key talent would be retained and built upon, the club itself would no longer be a jobns for friends place but with the best people in the roles that we could attract, yest again we are starting to see the signs of that, commercial dealings would be masively increased (possibly through the slightly dodgy city model of Usmanov self funding those deals) and the club would be fast tracked to the status it enjoyed under Moores time at the helm, as in one of the top teams both on and off the field.

Short term we'd see a massive sea change in the club, long term it would be unrecognizeable and after a settlign in period with the 'media' etc we'd be put on par with the way they regard Chelsea, City etc, but with a hostory that far exceeds those clubs - and a hostory that whilst largely ignored in recent times by the media world, would quickly get disted off and brought out again should the club once again join the top clubs in the country

 

[bluestevon]

Seems a perfectly reasonable timescale. I guess we'll know the truth by this time next year. Whatever it is our future is certainly looking a whole lot brighter than it was only a few months ago.

Said before mate, i'm happy with Moshiri at the helm and should that be the end of it, then we will do well, but am convinced that it is the start of a much more organised and bigger takeover than we could have ever hoped for

 

[ggooggooggoo]

Share buyout will 100% happen first, new stadium site will be 100% signed and sealed also, Usmanov won't take any even slight risk of leaving one mess to join another, Moshiri will have to have sorted both things out, then it's a simple matter of sell at Arsenal and buying into Blue Heaven holdings as an equal partner.

So a guestimate on timeline would be later this year to early next - maybe stretching till the summer before it falls into place.

What would a partnership mean, foremost i think it would give us not only the vision of joining the 'elite' but also the financial means to do so - on a timescale that with just Moshiri would be totally impossible, Moshiri alone can turn us into a very well ran club, can sort out the club from top to bottom, can have us competing on the pitch and financially at a level we couldn only have dreamed about a couple of years back, but theres a ceiling on that - we can reach the spurs level but to go above that - the gulf is so huge that it would take a generation or more and would need success throughout that generation on the pitch - all the whilst having 3 clubs who financially can at the flcik of a switch decide to blow the competition out the water (thats assuming nothing major happens involving Liverpool, West Ham or Spurs as well - as all 3 of those are in a situation that a takeover from an Oligarch, Sheikh or Chinese consortium would see them joining the likes of City, chelsea and United as almost untouchable to us - even with Moshiri at the helm)

In simplest terms, the club 'should' be debt free (already apparently is according to some), a new stadium that would match or eclipse those of the biggest clubs in the coountry would be in place (a riverside one would do that - and apparently is also no longer a pipe dream) - with none of that cost being past onto the club as debt, the key talent would be retained and built upon, the club itself would no longer be a jobns for friends place but with the best people in the roles that we could attract, yest again we are starting to see the signs of that, commercial dealings would be masively increased (possibly through the slightly dodgy city model of Usmanov self funding those deals) and the club would be fast tracked to the status it enjoyed under Moores time at the helm, as in one of the top teams both on and off the field.

Short term we'd see a massive sea change in the club, long term it would be unrecognizeable and after a settlign in period with the 'media' etc we'd be put on par with the way they regard Chelsea, City etc, but with a hostory that far exceeds those clubs - and a hostory that whilst largely ignored in recent times by the media world, would quickly get disted off and brought out again should the club once again join the top clubs in the country

 

[blulouie]

Obsessive as in ive asked I think at most 4 / 5 times over two days. Each time relavtive to a new claim by @The Esk.

Obessive as in ive done the respectable thing and replied to someones questioning of my post? Sure thats how a forum works.

But I'll play by your rules...

Why do you feel the need the defend someone, who could easily have answered the question from the start? I think you need to find something better do with your life, spending your time defending a faceless avatar over the internet - oh the humanity.

Who said I was defending anyone ?
Could be any poster , you have made you point more than adequately.
Read your posts back , if you think that you havent made your point enough use the pm option.
If not it looks like you have an unhealthy agenda.....move on mate.

 

[PhilM]

As ive said before, its the source is so 'sensitve' then nothing should be revealed.
When information, however vaugue, is in the public domain it is open to interpretations, which can adversely affect his source.
Why is the esk willing to jeopardise an individual(s) job by leaking information?

You can't have sensitive information and leak it, then hide behind a vail when questioned - its sitting on the fence.

I'm not personally defending The Esk in the slightest if that's how it appears, yet rather the ability to disclose and discuss fairly and justly on here.

Maybe I'm wrong, however I perceive that you would prefer it to be a linear process of either full disclosure or to have no disclosure at all.

You would rather individuals tell all, which is itself impractical, or simply keep their mouth shut entirely. Yet, it is unfortunately not like that.

Be it to the authorities or to the press, limited disclosure (giving snippets although not enough for liability) is an aspect of providing information.

To one degree it protects the source thus not stopping the spread of information, although arguably it opens up the aspect of integrity as you say.

There are other people on here and on other forums who give snippets of information, and it's for us personally to decide what we take of it.

If there was no information released then we'd have no press coverage at all and very limited discussion on here, as it's the basis for most debate.

In the instance of The Esk then maybe his position does add an additional factor, but I wouldn't say that is in anyway intentional on his behalf.

He's a long-standing and trusted poster on here so people may be more inclined to listen, however you're within your right to doubt and question.

All I am saying is that by making your own thinly veiled allegations as above isn't exactly the subtlest approach to expressing your concerns.

Why not message him directly and ask him? Take it all with a pinch of salt? Or simply read his opinion and chose to disregard it as many do?

Instead, from an objective point of view it does look like it's become a personal witch-hunt, which doesn't do your own integrity any good.

And again that's not defending the Esk but rather an observation of yourself and the situation at hand, which is a real shame really.

As you appear to be quite an articulate individual who could contribute a lot to the forum and you're more than correct to question and doubt.

However, intentionally making yourself an outcast or pariah by latching on to one poster in the way you go about it will not help the situation.

In the end, I am more than happy for people to given information on here and I judge it myself rather than lambaste and criticise.

 

[catcherintherye]

Share buyout will 100% happen first, new stadium site will be 100% signed and sealed also, Usmanov won't take any even slight risk of leaving one mess to join another, Moshiri will have to have sorted both things out, then it's a simple matter of sell at Arsenal and buying into Blue Heaven holdings as an equal partner.

So a guestimate on timeline would be later this year to early next - maybe stretching till the summer before it falls into place.

What would a partnership mean, foremost i think it would give us not only the vision of joining the 'elite' but also the financial means to do so - on a timescale that with just Moshiri would be totally impossible, Moshiri alone can turn us into a very well ran club, can sort out the club from top to bottom, can have us competing on the pitch and financially at a level we couldn only have dreamed about a couple of years back, but theres a ceiling on that - we can reach the spurs level but to go above that - the gulf is so huge that it would take a generation or more and would need success throughout that generation on the pitch - all the whilst having 3 clubs who financially can at the flcik of a switch decide to blow the competition out the water (thats assuming nothing major happens involving Liverpool, West Ham or Spurs as well - as all 3 of those are in a situation that a takeover from an Oligarch, Sheikh or Chinese consortium would see them joining the likes of City, chelsea and United as almost untouchable to us - even with Moshiri at the helm)

In simplest terms, the club 'should' be debt free (already apparently is according to some), a new stadium that would match or eclipse those of the biggest clubs in the coountry would be in place (a riverside one would do that - and apparently is also no longer a pipe dream) - with none of that cost being past onto the club as debt, the key talent would be retained and built upon, the club itself would no longer be a jobns for friends place but with the best people in the roles that we could attract, yest again we are starting to see the signs of that, commercial dealings would be masively increased (possibly through the slightly dodgy city model of Usmanov self funding those deals) and the club would be fast tracked to the status it enjoyed under Moores time at the helm, as in one of the top teams both on and off the field.

Short term we'd see a massive sea change in the club, long term it would be unrecognizeable and after a settlign in period with the 'media' etc we'd be put on par with the way they regard Chelsea, City etc, but with a hostory that far exceeds those clubs - and a hostory that whilst largely ignored in recent times by the media world, would quickly get disted off and brought out again should the club once again join the top clubs in the country

Great post mate and a perfect summary. The only part I'd add is I suspect Moshiri has far more money than the 2 billion or so than he is credited with (and Forbes even acknowledge as much).

Moshiri has allowed us to jump to Spurs level and in all honesty Liverpool level in terms of investment. If he stayed alone I could see us resembling Spurs quite closely, well run, efficient and able to grow. This as you've said in both spending potential and growth of the brand is miles ahead of where we were.

If Usmanov comes (in all likelihood with Sochi) then we are in the big leagues. Both he and Usmanov are well ahead of Abramovic's wealth. We would be in a bracket that only really City (and currently United) would be in and across the continent only PSG (and at a push Real/Barca/Bayern) could compete with. It would be that significant.

They key point would be that not only would they be wealthy but very determined to build a club from the bottom up. In terms of owners combined wealth, only City and PSG would be wealthier than that in world football.

The other important point to note here is location. From what the Russian guy said on the board said at signing Koeman he made reference to falling behind in the North West. While London initially attracted investment there is every possibility that the North West will become the footballing capital of not just England but the world. It already has two globally iconic clubs and probably the best backed club in the world (in City). Trying to forge ourselves as part of that will be huge for us but also people can probably see the potential from a business perspective. 4 Iconic sports Franchises all within an hours drive of one another would be a unique situation. That is the potential they see.

I can only hope so as it would also do wonders for the local economy beyond football.

 

[ultra]

I've took the piss out of it before but the Eskimos genuinely are turning into what I was unfairly goading. The lad @R934 has come on and been articulate enough and he's getting crap for it? I reckon @The Esk welcomes the balance of debate too so it just looks trite if he's getting shouted down for his concerns, whether unfounded or not. Like I got jumped on a few months ago by the devotees.

Nothing is ever 100%, I was out with a fella who is very ITK (met his sources) last night and he said that the Usmanov thing looks on.

Who knows?

Was that fella WRD, chico?

 

[kithnou]

Great post mate and a perfect summary. The only part I'd add is I suspect Moshiri has far more money than the 2 billion or so than he is credited with (and Forbes even acknowledge as much).

Moshiri has allowed us to jump to Spurs level and in all honesty Liverpool level in terms of investment. If he stayed alone I could see us resembling Spurs quite closely, well run, efficient and able to grow. This as you've said in both spending potential and growth of the brand is miles ahead of where we were.

If Usmanov comes (in all likelihood with Sochi) then we are in the big leagues. Both he and Usmanov are well ahead of Abramovic's wealth. We would be in a bracket that only really City (and currently United) would be in and across the continent only PSG (and at a push Real/Barca/Bayern) could compete with. It would be that significant.

They key point would be that not only would they be wealthy but very determined to build a club from the bottom up. In terms of owners combined wealth, only City and PSG would be wealthier than that in world football.

The other important point to note here is location. From what the Russian guy said on the board said at signing Koeman he made reference to falling behind in the North West. While London initially attracted investment there is every possibility that the North West will become the footballing capital of not just England but the world. It already has two globally iconic clubs and probably the best backed club in the world (in City). Trying to forge ourselves as part of that will be huge for us but also people can probably see the potential from a business perspective. 4 Iconic sports Franchises all within an hours drive of one another would be a unique situation. That is the potential they see.

I can only hope so as it would also do wonders for the local economy beyond football.

Who is Sochi?

 

[chicoazul]

Was that fella WRD, chico?

Sake. That obvious?

 

[chicoazul]

I'm not personally defending The Esk in the slightest if that's how it appears, yet rather the ability to disclose and discuss fairly and justly on here.

Maybe I'm wrong, however I perceive that you would prefer it to be a linear process of either full disclosure or to have no disclosure at all.

You would rather individuals tell all, which is itself impractical, or simply keep their mouth shut entirely. Yet, it is unfortunately not like that.

Be it to the authorities or to the press, limited disclosure (giving snippets although not enough for liability) is an aspect of providing information.

To one degree it protects the source thus not stopping the spread of information, although arguably it opens up the aspect of integrity as you say.

There are other people on here and on other forums who give snippets of information, and it's for us personally to decide what we take of it.

If there was no information released then we'd have no press coverage at all and very limited discussion on here, as it's the basis for most debate.

In the instance of The Esk then maybe his position does add an additional factor, but I wouldn't say that is in anyway intentional on his behalf.

He's a long-standing and trusted poster on here so people may be more inclined to listen, however you're within your right to doubt and question.

All I am saying is that by making your own thinly veiled allegations as above isn't exactly the subtlest approach to expressing your concerns.

Why not message him directly and ask him? Take it all with a pinch of salt? Or simply read his opinion and chose to disregard it as many do?

Instead, from an objective point of view it does look like it's become a personal witch-hunt, which doesn't do your own integrity any good.

And again that's not defending the Esk but rather an observation of yourself and the situation at hand, which is a real shame really.

As you appear to be quite an articulate individual who could contribute a lot to the forum and you're more than correct to question and doubt.

However, intentionally making yourself an outcast or pariah by latching on to one poster in the way you go about it will not help the situation.

In the end, I am more than happy for people to given information on here and I judge it myself rather than lambaste and criticise.

Lid what's going on with your post formatting?

That looks like a mad arse GCSE poem to study.

 

[ultra]

Sake. That obvious?

Sorry, but you did tell us the other day that you were gong for a pint with him! Interesting that he still thinks Usmanov is on, all the same...

 

[chicoazul]

Sorry, but you did tell us the other day that you were gong for a pint with him! Interesting that he still thinks Usmanov is on, all the same...

Ah right. Christ I am dull. Well spotted.