Alisher Usmanov

[bluestevon]

Ah, so I see this thread is still going then...

Mickey, it's a far more valid and interesting thread than thirty player transfer rumour ones. I'd guess a really low % of our fan base has ever read that letter or understands just how joined at the hip moshiri and usmanov have been for nigh in three decades.

 

[Manx Blue]

I like the way in which Moshiri formed Blue & White Holdings, as opposed to his Arsenal shareholding with AU under Red & White Holdings.

It's ON.

 

[The Esk]

If and a big if he was looking to sell his shares in Arsenal then my guess is that Kronke wouldn't hesitate and probably would use the facility he had inplace to buy shares with, I think, Detusche Bank

75% ownership enables him to in effect change the way that Arsenal are structured as a company and if he were to get total ownership , which he would if he purchased Usmanovs 30%, it would enable him to take control of the huge pot of gold that Arsenal have built up.

The Arsenals supporters trust are understandably twitchy a about Kronkes position and whilst he gave certain assurances when he failed last time to take control it was more about not putting debt on the company to finance any share purchase.

With respect mate, Kroenke has complete control over Arsenal now save for if he wished to do something that required a special resolution. The Articles of Assocation last amended in 2009 lean very heavily in favour of the incumbent majority shareholder in terms of what can be done by ordinary resolution.

Save for those events requiring a special resolution by statute (change of company name, reduction in share capital etc) there's almost nothing he can't achieve with this current shareholding.

Hence my comments yesterday about Kroenke not being a purchaser in the unlikely event of a sale.

 

[D410]

With respect mate, Kroenke has complete control over Arsenal now save for if he wished to do something that required a special resolution. The Articles of Assocation last amended in 2009 lean very heavily in favour of the incumbent majority shareholder in terms of what can be done by ordinary resolution.

Save for those events requiring a special resolution by statute (change of company name, reduction in share capital etc) there's almost nothing he can't achieve with this current shareholding.

Hence my comments yesterday about Kroenke not being a purchaser in the unlikely event of a sale.

Yep you have been clear and consistent about your message from the start on this matter.
Still on holiday?
We are getting the shakes here waiting for the next transfer news bomb to drop from you.

 

[The Esk]

Yep you have been clear and consistent about your message from the start on this matter.
Still on holiday?
We are getting the shakes here waiting for the next transfer news bomb to drop from you.

Haha still on holiday mate. Will be back just before the window slams shut......

 

[bluestevon]

With respect mate, Kroenke has complete control over Arsenal now save for if he wished to do something that required a special resolution. The Articles of Assocation last amended in 2009 lean very heavily in favour of the incumbent majority shareholder in terms of what can be done by ordinary resolution.

Save for those events requiring a special resolution by statute (change of company name, reduction in share capital etc) there's almost nothing he can't achieve with this current shareholding.

Hence my comments yesterday about Kroenke not being a purchaser in the unlikely event of a sale.

As its his oft stated aim to leave the club to his two children, possibly maybe grandchildren as the case may be, does a 100% ownership not make sense if that's his aim.

Why exactly did he purchase the last arsenal shares that became available if owning more shares at this point is pointless? Kroenke isn't a man to spend money for no reason.

Why are Arsenal a special case, meaning that only by owning shares that grant power does it seemingly become a wortwhilst investment?

Is it not additionally possible that the current stance on no board position or influence for Usmanov stems entirely down to the relationship between kroenke and usmanov and should another party own those shares then the same fractured relationship and distrust wouldn't be present and thus one of the big stumbling blocks in your opinion to anyone wanting to buy them actually would be no such issue?

 

[Paul w]

Yep you have been clear and consistent about your message from the start on this matter.
Still on holiday?
We are getting the shakes here waiting for the next transfer news bomb to drop from you.

Is that the royal we or just you.

 

[The Esk]

As its his oft stated aim to leave the club to his two children, possibly maybe grandchildren as the case may be, does a 100% ownership not make sense if that's his aim.

Why exactly did he purchase the last arsenal shares that became available if owning more shares at this point is pointless? Kroenke isn't a man to spend money for no reason.

Why are Arsenal a special case, meaning that only by owning shares that grant power does it seemingly become a wortwhilst investment?

Is it not additionally possible that the current stance on no board position or influence for Usmanov stems entirely down to the relationship between kroenke and usmanov and should another party own those shares then the same fractured relationship and distrust wouldn't be present and thus one of the big stumbling blocks in your opinion to anyone wanting to buy them actually would be no such issue?

Mate, I think you'll find he did not purchase all the shares that recently became available (he acquired 23 of the 40 on offer at the time).

I think most people recognise that having a compliant board is Kroenke’s standard operating practice, be it Usmanov or someone else trying to achieve board representation.

Think about it for a moment. He owns 2/3rd of the company yet it is completely his own fiefdom. The man is a complete autocrat, he doesn't want or need external opinion nor does he need additional shares to achieve his aims.

 

[blue62]

Yes. And some people know more than others... For example, I knew of Moshiris interest last aug-sept....

You're seemingly ITK, maybe you could expand a little.

 

[bluestevon]

Mate, I think you'll find he did not purchase all the shares that recently became available (he acquired 23 of the 40 on offer at the time).

I think most people recognise that having a compliant board is Kroenke’s standard operating practice, be it Usmanov or someone else trying to achieve board representation.

Think about it for a moment. He owns 2/3rd of the company yet it is completely his own fiefdom. The man is a complete autocrat, he doesn't want or need external opinion nor does he need additional shares to achieve his aims.

Then why did he buy 23 out the 40 recently avaiblable mate? Illogical no?

Using such thinking, why would anyone ever bother full ownership of any company

Who says a new 30% shareholder wouldn't be compliant AND on the board, he'll we've Ben ran for how long with multiple large shareholders who done nothing and basically proxies there shares to all intent to give kenwright the same level of control kroenke has, but we accept that as being fi e that shareholders would be ok with that for us but not at arsenal?

You never answered the bit about passing the club onto multiple family members and the advantage a 100% ownership would give either mate?

 

[Milk]

Look carefully at this painting below:



These are the forebears of Mr U, a mix of Zaporizhian Cossacks, Uzbeks & Tajiks, writing a very rude letter to the Sultan of Turkey. They do not take kindly to be told what to do.

For what it's worth, I cannot see Mr U being over the moon watching Kroenke rule the roost and a bit of devilment might be stirring in his breast?

Also, say this out aloud:

"Fourteen thousand million pounds"

And repeat

And then consider what we'd give to have that sort of backing behind the Mosh. It's happening .............

 

[RaleighBlue]

With respect mate, Kroenke has complete control over Arsenal now save for if he wished to do something that required a special resolution. The Articles of Assocation last amended in 2009 lean very heavily in favour of the incumbent majority shareholder in terms of what can be done by ordinary resolution.

Save for those events requiring a special resolution by statute (change of company name, reduction in share capital etc) there's almost nothing he can't achieve with this current shareholding.

Hence my comments yesterday about Kroenke not being a purchaser in the unlikely event of a sale.

Does he not financially profit from owning more shares in a company that is undergoing vast growth in its valuation though?

Is it all about control? Or does Kroenke factor in the actual financial investment? My knowledge of his handling his American team tells me he mainly cares about squeezing as much money out as possible with the least amount of work.

 

[DanB90]

Mate, I think you'll find he did not purchase all the shares that recently became available (he acquired 23 of the 40 on offer at the time).

I think most people recognise that having a compliant board is Kroenke’s standard operating practice, be it Usmanov or someone else trying to achieve board representation.

Think about it for a moment. He owns 2/3rd of the company yet it is completely his own fiefdom. The man is a complete autocrat, he doesn't want or need external opinion nor does he need additional shares to achieve his aims.

Are you of the opinion that Usmanov would struggle to sell his stake at Arsenal, given it would lead to no control of the club for the buyer?
Would it not still be viewed as a sound investment by most even under these circumstances?

 

[orly]

I like the way in which Moshiri formed Blue & White Holdings, as opposed to his Arsenal shareholding with AU under Red & White Holdings.

It's ON.

He didn't. It's Blue Heaven Holdings

http://toffeeweb.com/season/15-16/news/32821.html

 

[chicoazul]

You're seemingly ITK, maybe you could expand a little.

By "ITK" he really means "blert" mate.