Usmanov

rochdaleblue · January 21, 2018

We could have all the money on the world, but if you don’t have the right infracture in place. Excellent manager, competent DOF and a forward thinking board, then we will only see more money squandered along the lines of what we have seen in the last 18 months.

zzebra · January 21, 2018

rochdaleblue said:
We could have all the money on the world, but if you don’t have the right infracture in place. Excellent manager, competent DOF and a forward thinking board, then we will only see more money squandered along the lines of what we have seen in the last 18 months.

True, but it took City 10 years to get their infrastructure right.

Their first few seasons of money they were still light years behind Chelsea and United despite the big transfers.

rochdaleblue · January 21, 2018

zzebra said:
True, but it took City 10 years to get their infrastructure right.

Their first few seasons of money they were still light years behind Chelsea and United despite the big transfers.

But with FFP in place, we cannot afford to squander money like we have, following the sales of Stones and Lukaku.

Sir Alan · January 21, 2018

He ain’t ever coming lads ever.

We are stuck with the clowns until we move stadium.

LouReedwalkonthewildside · January 21, 2018

AndyC said:
Highly likely to be nothing more than wishful thinking given Usmanov would need to sell all his interests in Arsenal first and finding someone or a group with that kind of loot who would be prepared to buy into a club - that Stan Kroenke controls - and have literally no power is a big ask.

That's the thing, who is going to spend all that dosh on Usmanov's shares, only too, as you say, literally have no power or say on what goes on.

ToffeeTim · January 21, 2018

AndyC said:
Highly likely to be nothing more than wishful thinking given Usmanov would need to sell all his interests in Arsenal first and finding someone or a group with that kind of loot who would be prepared to buy into a club - that Stan Kroenke controls - and have literally no power is a big ask.

It's remarkable that you and the esk are still pedalling the idea that no one on the planet would like to purchase a significant chunk of such a low risk, highly profitable organisation such as Arsenal Football Club. It's a huge fallacy, borderline ludicrous. If he wanted to sell, there would be tens of would be buyers.

I'm not saying Usmanov is likely but the no buyers point is downright daft.

Berenger · January 21, 2018

zzebra said:
True, but it took City 10 years to get their infrastructure right.

Their first few seasons of money they were still light years behind Chelsea and United despite the big transfers.

The vision of the City Football Group project has been outstanding from day one. The Shinawatra days were not. You won't catch leaders in a couple of seasons. It's a medium-term thing. All you are seeing now with City is the natural progression of excellent decisions made years ago.

AndyC · January 21, 2018

ToffeeTim said:
It's remarkable that you and the esk are still pedalling the idea that no one on the planet would like to purchase a significant chunk of such a low risk, highly profitable organisation such as Arsenal Football Club. It's a huge fallacy, borderline ludicrous. If he wanted to sell, there would be tens of would be buyers.

I'm not saying Usmanov is likely but the no buyers point is downright daft.

I'm not saying buying into Arsenal wouldn't be a good investment - I'm suggesting that someone or a group with that kind of loot would, to my mind at least, probably want to have some degree of influence.

There's also the moot point that if as you suggest there will be something of a queue of potential buyers, whether Usmanov actually wants to sell?
He's tried to buy Kroenke out, and I know it's rather simplistic, but that hardly suggests he's going to cut and run does it?

catcherintherye · January 21, 2018

AndyC said:
Highly likely to be nothing more than wishful thinking given Usmanov would need to sell all his interests in Arsenal first and finding someone or a group with that kind of loot who would be prepared to buy into a club - that Stan Kroenke controls - and have literally no power is a big ask.

I also think there's a very real question about motive here. If (as I believe) Usmanov has an interest in EFC and can thus exert certain control, what does he get from junking Arsenal in at the moment?

Alternatively if he has no interest he will stay too. I see no massive reason for him to get involved currently, and have always felt it only made sense when formal plans for the stadium are underway.

ToffeeTim · January 21, 2018

AndyC said:
I'm not saying buying into Arsenal wouldn't be a good investment - I'm suggesting that someone or a group with that kind of loot would, to my mind at least, probably want to have some degree of influence.

There's also the moot point that if as you suggest there will be something of a queue of potential buyers, whether Usmanov actually wants to sell?
He's tried to buy Kroenke out, and I know it's rather simplistic, but that hardly suggests he's going to cut and run does it?

I'm not arguing on the second part of your post. As I'd already said, I was highlighting the madness of suggesting there would be no buyers. It's a safe as houses investment and people like making money. There's nothing else really to be said. There are millions of people in the UK who own shares and don't have controlling stakes. Arsenal would be no different.

orly · January 21, 2018

ToffeeTim said:
It's remarkable that you and the esk are still pedalling the idea that no one on the planet would like to purchase a significant chunk of such a low risk, highly profitable organisation such as Arsenal Football Club. It's a huge fallacy, borderline ludicrous. If he wanted to sell, there would be tens of would be buyers.

I'm not saying Usmanov is likely but the no buyers point is downright daft.

I think at this stage, with his opinions and "facts" debunked sometimes within the hour, we are well beyond taking anything the Esk says as gospel.

If Usmanov chose to sell his stake, investment funds all over the show would be right in there, and there is no reason at all he won't.

ToffeeTim · January 21, 2018

orly said:
I think at this stage, with his opinions and "facts" debunked sometimes within the hour, we are well beyond taking anything the Esk says as gospel.

If Usmanov chose to sell his stake, investment funds all over the show would be right in there, and there is no reason at all he won't.

I bought a few shares in lloyds. Regret it now though mate, don't think I'm ever gonna get controlling stake lol

LouReedwalkonthewildside · January 21, 2018

ToffeeTim said:
It's remarkable that you and the esk are still pedalling the idea that no one on the planet would like to purchase a significant chunk of such a low risk, highly profitable organisation such as Arsenal Football Club. It's a huge fallacy, borderline ludicrous. If he wanted to sell, there would be tens of would be buyers.

I'm not saying Usmanov is likely but the no buyers point is downright daft.

So if you're a business and you paid £400m+ for Usmanov's shares would you be happy to not have a seat on the Arsenal board (like Usmanov) and have no say in the running of the club (like Usmanov) ?

ToffeeTim · January 21, 2018

LouReedwalkonthewildside said:
So if you're a business and you paid £400m+ for Usmanov's shares would you be happy to not have a seat on the Arsenal board (like Usmanov) and have no say in the running of the club?

If you're an investment fund then yes. Clearly yes.

Lanolin · January 21, 2018

zzebra said:
True, but it took City 10 years to get their infrastructure right.

Their first few seasons of money they were still light years behind Chelsea and United despite the big transfers.

That’s not even close to being true though. It hasn’t even been 10 years since city were taken over, and they’ve had an excellent infrastructure in place for years.