It's time for Usmanov

This post remind me of what George W Bush Jr. famous quote
"If you aren't with me, you are against me"

anyway, the bold part : Quite sure you are wrong, just because I am against PHW way of controlling this football club it doesn't mean I have given my support to Usmanov.

and the rest of your post above are 100% assumptions of what you think about me.

You know what? I genuinely didn't realise you hadn't thrown you support behind Usmanov. Comes with the territory of two long simultaneous arguments. My bad.

No problem, comes with the argument

Funny though that you seemed to take the other stuff as a slight on you, I was talking about fans in general, I even used the pronoun "we". My point was that there are fans more aggressive than you doesn't make their opinion correct.

If I felt anything was a slight at me, I would have drop this debate long ago. I used "I" instead of "we" because I don't want to cloud my judgement.

Why I was reminded of George Bush?
Because I felt from reading your posts, you are inclined to divide posters into 2 groups pro & contra, while in reality there are another group that is in the middle.

A wise word :
It's because one love someone one scold and reprimand them as a showing of love,
If one who don't love someone, one simply don't care.

So you are more critical of the board because you love Arsenal more than I do?

No, it means I have a different way of showing my love to Arsenal than you..
you believe, I reprimand.

Which is why I posted we need to show ambitions instead just wait for 2014 and everything will be sorted.
To achieve greater commercial sponsorship we need to improve our position on the field, as simple as that.
What is less simple than this statement? Sponsors love winners.

I choose my leader based on example, and Fiszman has shown his work.
You are assuming again...

In a debate such as this, some assumptions are going to have be made as you are talking about theoretical events. When you say that Arsenal would be better placed for sponsors had they made 1-2 more signings a season, and we would have done better on the pitch that is called an assumption. You can't just stop and say "no assumptions" when you're doing exactly that and I wonder if you're so critical of those making huge assumptions about Usmanov and his intentions?

I'll stand by what I said

Which is why I posted we need to show ambitions instead just wait for 2014 and everything will be sorted.
To achieve greater commercial sponsorship we need to improve our position on the field, as simple as that.
What is less simple than this statement?
Sponsors love winners.

this one is reality. Worldwide sports team (not just football) proves it.

the rest is up to you to judge as assumptions or reality.

And while we're on the subject of assumptions.

If we had followed up on our 2004 team and increase our team further we would have been closer to the top of the world, financially and most importantly footballing-wise.

you think they care about the long run? short term profit is what the board wants.

I look at the reality, Arsenal has been in decline in the football pitch and its' getting worry some as none of the board seems to know (or care) as long as Arsenal remains in short term profit position.

If you think those statements are assumptions so be it, I feel it could have been closer to reality have the board been pro-active several years back. But since what's done is done..

FYI regarding Usmanov, I had debated Anzac about Usmanov's plan and how he will keep his promise a few pages back.

the bottom line for me, the board need to improve our team this season is very crucial so we don't go to commercial negotiations with a weak hand, let's hope Carzola really comes and we win something this year.

and1rew wrote:
Rain Dance wrote:
This post remind me of what George W Bush Jr. famous quote
"If you aren't with me, you are against me"

anyway, the bold part : Quite sure you are wrong, just because I am against PHW way of controlling this football club it doesn't mean I have given my support to Usmanov.

I don't understand how this has turned into an argument between the pro-Usmanov and the ''we want neither Kroenke or Usmanov'' factions.

The latter option is something we all would have preferred in an ideal world. The reality is that the only options are Kroenke and Usmanov. I haven't yet seen anyone make an argument in favour of Kroenke, so at least we are fairly united on that front.

What the fence sitters need to face up to is that the anti-Usmanov voice is effectively a pro-Kroenke stance. Look upon it as the lesser of two evils.

let's hope Carzola really comes and we win something this year.

I think we can all agree on that.

What the fence sitters need to face up to is that the anti-Usmanov voice is effectively a pro-Kroenke stance. Look upon it as the lesser of two evils.

The funny thing is I was about to say at least the thread has got everyone agreeing on some basic things at least i.e. now that Kroenke is on the board, the board has maintained the status quo - he hasn't changed anything for better or worse. It took 4 pages of discussion but now you're trying to bring that narrative back. Guess you don't agree.

Just think if Kroenke's original intentions were how the board are behaving now, why would Dein bring him in at all? Think your antipathy towards Kroenke is misplaced, even though I don't agree surely it should be the board who invited him you hate?

Won't even get into your Usmanov trust issues.

let's hope Carzola really comes and we win something this year.

I think we can all agree on that.

What the fence sitters need to face up to is that the anti-Usmanov voice is effectively a pro-Kroenke stance. Look upon it as the lesser of two evils.

The funny thing is I was about to say at least the thread has got everyone agreeing on some basic things at least i.e. now that Kroenke is on the board, the board has maintained the status quo - he hasn't changed anything for better or worse. It took 4 pages of discussion but now you're trying to bring that narrative back. Guess you don't agree.

Just think if Kroenke's original intentions were how the board are behaving now, why would Dein bring him in at all? Think your antipathy towards Kroenke is misplaced, even though I don't agree surely it should be the board who invited him you hate?

Won't even get into your Usmanov trust issues.

Dein approached Kroenke then sold his shares to Usmanov so unless you are stll using the greedy Dein argument I can't see how you can think that David thought that Kroenke would be able to offer the financial clout that he thought was required. Kroenke has invested his money in the shares he has no interest in adding anything more that is at least clear now, he seem to see the earnings of arsenal increasing without any investment required and doesn't think we are about to see a fall (CL etc) so won't get his wallet out.

I don't think Kroenke has an interest in competing with citeh, united and chelsea in going for a title.He is more than happy where we are in the hope that FFP and eventual increased revenue create a more natural enviroment for us to be able to come close to matching them. Whether that happens or not has yet to be played out but that is there tactic and it aint gonna change anytime soon.

Dein approached Kroenke then sold his shares to Usmanov so unless you are stll using the greedy Dein argument I can't see how you can think that David thought that Kroenke would be able to offer the financial clout that he thought was required. Kroenke has invested his money in the shares he has no interest in adding anything more that is at least clear now, he seem to see the earnings of arsenal increasing without any investment required and doesn't think we are about to see a fall (CL etc) so won't get his wallet out.

I don't think Kroenke has an interest in competing with citeh, united and chelsea in going for a title.He is more than happy where we are in the hope that FFP and eventual increased revenue create a more natural enviroment for us to be able to come close to matching them. Whether that happens or not has yet to be played out but that is there tactic and it aint gonna change anytime soon.

The greedy Dein argument? I've never said that. Someone said earlier in the thread that the reason why Dein eventually sought out Usmanov was due to the board's initial large opposition to Kroenke. Not sure if that's true but it sounds certainly more credible than Dein going through all the effort of finding Kroenke, sounding him out as a potential buyer and a potential hostile takeover risking his place on the board without even realising Kroenke would not want to invest, as you're suggesting? I doubt it. If Lady Nina had not grassed Dein up and accepted Kroenke's and his offer then he and Dein would have been on the board. It wasn't because of an aversion to spending.

All I'm bemused about is why people hate him when nothing's actually changed. I've heard people say it's all his fault and he's killing our club but I actually fail to see what he's done either way substantially. How would people think the last year would have played out if Kroenke didn't become majority shareholder? Do you get my drift?

Apologies on the greed issue my bad.

Quick analogy though, when your looking for a house do you just take the first thing on offer or do you take the best offer? I expect he sounded out Kroenke as a potential investor but doubt that he decided to sell to Usmanov just becasue the board were apposed to Kroenke. Hill-Wood was mostly concerned about maintaining their position in the club (allude to in his recent comments) and Fizsman wanted to make sure his vision for the club was preserved. Both wanted to get Dein out and keep him away for daring to change the way thing were done and circumventing them by looking for investors, soemthing that would have weakened all of their interst in a club whose value was about to explode. Kroenke's offer then became attractive when Dein stuck his lot in with Usmanov as they needed to find someone who would keep Dein away and as Kroenke being so hands off allowed Peter Hill-Wood would get his control of the club back.

You say nothing has changed since Kroenke took majority ownership, firstly one big thing has changed the club no longer has plurality of ownership. Before with multiple people who had a vested interest contributing to the direction of the club with different ideas and innovation. Gazidis and co want you to think having a single voice of the board is great. That voice is the cronyism of the board entirely appointed by Hill-Wood for his own benefit so we can't establsih whether the current plan stands up to critism in any way.

Its as much Peter Hill-Wood's club as he could hope since he sold off his shares through the 80s to Dein for "dead money", who instead of just picking them up through family put his own money in to become involved in the club he obviously loves. Well done to the man his plan is machiavellism at its best and for some reason, even though he has no shares he is running the club with the full support of the majority shareholder.

So I'm not just pissed at Kroenke's ownership which allows this but the boards (previous and present) as they are responsible for making sure the club wont be using the resources of the only investor who is willing and able to help us offset the costs of the inept funding model for the emirates stadium.

But the previous board with Hill-Wood, Carr and Bracewell-Smith holding large stakes in the club gained through family ties its no wonder they didn't want to do anything that would require them to stump up cash or dilute their equity. They hadn't bought into the club and more than anyone else should have been asked to dip into their pockets to help fund the stadium but instead made sure when they sold out in the end it was for a large slab of money.

So now its a unitary decision as to whether you support Kroenke or Usmanov as there is no plan for any dialog between the two, and no situation where Stan would sell part of his stake to someone else who could in turn sell to Usmanov. Saying you don't want Usmanov in control of the club means you are happy with Kroenke and the way things are now, no change, Hill-Wood calling the shots and Arsenal looking largely like an old boys social club.

I want Arsenal to be dynamic and respond to what is happening in football rather than passively getting left behind crying about other clubs spending too much. From what we have heard so far Usmanov is the only person who has proposed anything even remotely viable in doing that rather than relying soley on the enforcement of FFP and that suddenly in 2014 we will be making the same off commercial deals as the competition.

N.B I thought Nina Bracewell-Smith was convinced by Hill-Wood to sell her shares to Kroenke and not Red&White Holdings around Fiszman's passing, a decision which she says she now regrets. So I can't see this as some sort of arrangement between her Dein when he had already saddled his bags with Usmanov.

Dein approached Kroenke then sold his shares to Usmanov

Do you really believe the stuff you are saying in this thread? Genuine question, maybe you're just trying to win an argument by leaving out whole swathes of information, maybe you just don't know what happened. I honestly can't tell.

What the fence sitters need to face up to is that the anti-Usmanov voice is effectively a pro-Kroenke stance. Look upon it as the lesser of two evils.

false dichotomy.


And you probably shouldn't use the term "lesser of two evils" when trying to argue for Usmanov.

I really don't understand why you doubt that Dein went for Usmanov after the board had such a hostile reaction to Kroenke. I think you're severely downplaying just how far down the line Kroenke and Dein were and as I mentioned previously had the board been on board with Dein, both Kroenke and Dein would have been on the board and that is a fact. He did way much more than just sound him out. What you're saying basically amounts to Dein not knowing what Kroenke was like, before risking his career on him.

I said there's been no substantial change and you mention no plurality of ownership but 1) there is still plurality of ownership, just one of the major shareholders is not on the board 2) were Usmanov to takeover as you support and presumably supported before Kroenke became majority shareholder, there would be no plurality ownership anyway so I find it strange that this is the main change you choose to describe. You wrote "firstly" so would love to know what other significant changes Kroenke has exacted in the last year.

To be honest, the way you're trying to frame the argument as either for us or against us is very OTT. Having said that I'm willing to accept the situation now and am looking forward to the club being more competitive. If Arsenal follow through with deals with Cazorla and Sahin, will you still insist we need Usmanov, as it'd be a lot harder to argue about a lack of investment.

You say nothing has changed since Kroenke took majority ownership, firstly one big thing has changed the club no longer has plurality of ownership.

I think you mean there is now a majority shareholder, there is still a plurality of ownership.

Its as much Peter Hill-Wood's club as he could hope since he sold off his shares through the 80s to Dein for "dead money", who instead of just picking them up through family put his own money in to become involved in the club he obviously loves. Well done to the man his plan is machiavellism at its best and for some reason, even though he has no shares he is running the club with the full support of the majority shareholder.

Regardless of whether Dein loves the club or not why is ok for him to sell his shares but not for PHW to sell his? And why is it ok for Dein to make money on his investment but not Kroenke, etc? Dein bought shares in the club but as far as I'm aware he didn't invest his own money into the squad, etc

Saying you don't want Usmanov in control of the club means you are happy with Kroenke and the way things are now, no change,

So if you don't want something to be worse you are automatically happy with how it is now?

Hill-Wood calling the shots

PHW does not call the shots at Arsenal.

rather than relying soley on the enforcement of FFP and that suddenly in 2014 we will be making the same off commercial deals as the competition.

You can't rely solely on 2 things.

All I'm bemused about is why people hate him when nothing's actually changed. I've heard people say it's all his fault and he's killing our club but I actually fail to see what he's done either way substantially. How would people think the last year would have played out if Kroenke didn't become majority shareholder? Do you get my drift?

Mate, this is exactly what I don't understand why some can't grasp. There are some decent points made by both 'sides' (though I'm loathe to call it that, since it's more in tune with what the 'pro-Usmanovs' want to portray the situation as), but there is also a lot of sheer ignorance, fanciful thinking, and even outright xenophobia (as bizarre as that in this situation).

All I'm bemused about is why people hate him when nothing's actually changed. I've heard people say it's all his fault and he's killing our club but I actually fail to see what he's done either way substantially. How would people think the last year would have played out if Kroenke didn't become majority shareholder? Do you get my drift?

Mate, this is exactly what I don't understand why some can't grasp. There are some decent points made by both 'sides' (though I'm loathe to call it that, since it's more in tune with what the 'pro-Usmanovs' want to portray the situation as), but there is also a lot of sheer ignorance, fanciful thinking, and even outright xenophobia (as bizarre as that in this situation).

Yeah I thought after 20 pages of discussion even though we've still got very polarised views there could be some facts that both sides could agree on, and it looked like this was one. But lo and behold draiocht fianna and evoh_1 come back with their siege mentality and we're back to square one.

I can't speak for other fans except myself.

If Usmanov can make RvP stay with his sponsorship, then I will welcome him. The club can renew RvP's sporting contract and pay the Dutchman 130k p/w. While Usmanov can give Robin a non-sporting contract equivalent to 60k p/w for 4 years.

Perhaps Usmanov won't do that, because that will be like gifting the current board and there is nothing for himself. But someone has to give in to BUY the fans' hearts. He had spent 70M for Dein's holdings when the share price was high. Surely he is generous enough to spend again.

C'mon Usmanov, show us your love.

To be honest, the board need to stop taking the piss with him if we're to see any of that "love".

The least he should get is a seat on the board as he owns nearly 30% of the club. Whatever you think of him, that situation in isolation is pretty pathetic.

But someone has to give in to BUY the fans' hearts.

If Santi do broke the transfer record, isn't it something like you said?

All I'm bemused about is why people hate him when nothing's actually changed. I've heard people say it's all his fault and he's killing our club but I actually fail to see what he's done either way substantially. How would people think the last year would have played out if Kroenke didn't become majority shareholder? Do you get my drift?

Mate, this is exactly what I don't understand why some can't grasp. There are some decent points made by both 'sides' (though I'm loathe to call it that, since it's more in tune with what the 'pro-Usmanovs' want to portray the situation as), but there is also a lot of sheer ignorance, fanciful thinking, and even outright xenophobia (as bizarre as that in this situation).

The fact that nothing has changed and he hasn't done anything either way is itself a big part of the problem. The environment around us is changing rapidly and our opponents are making big moves if you stand still while your rivals are moving forward logically you will fall behind. We nearly missed out on CL football and just scraped through on the last day thanks to Spurs and Newcastle failing over the last few matches. An owner who does nothing except maintain the status quo is frankly not good enough for a club like ours that expects to challenge for the title.

Why do people hate Kroenke?

1) He is not one of us. We are probably the only club in the country who have always been run by people with a deep affection for the club. The old blue bloods from the Hill Wood-Carr-Bracewell Smith family have been involved for four generations. For all of PHW's faults I don't think anyone doubts he is an Arsenal fan through and through. The more recent power brokers like Dein and Fiszman were passionate life-long Gooners.

Its got nothing to do with background either. The old boys are of aristocratic English stock. Dein is a North London Jew who made a career out of wheeler dealing in business and then in football. Fiszman is the son of Jewish refugees from Belgium who went on to build a fortune in South Africa.Ken Friar is a local working class boy who over the course of 70(!) years worked himself up from office boy to director of his club.

For all their flaws these people are or were Arsenal.

Usmanov is not one of us either, but he has an obvious affection for the game and the club. Kroenke doesn't.

2)A1ndrew is fond of quoting Usmanov's dividend statement. How about this for some Kroenke quotes?

“What was so tough about the Glazers’ situation?” said Kroenke. “They won. And they have increased revenues by a huge amount. If I was a fan of that club I would go ’wow’. Because how could you do it any better?”

“In the States, you would never get this dialogue. He [Glazer] took money out of the club. So what? Jerry Buss [the owner of the Los Angeles Lakers] takes money out of the club. A lot of owners in the US do. No-one ever says anything about it. Did the Lakers win anything? Well, yeah, they did. How big is their revenue? Pretty darn good.”

The second quote made me laugh, because he had to use the LA Lakers as an example of a successful team. Strangely enough he couldn't use any of his own.

Apart from that bit of comedy these are disturbing comments. As Gooners its tempting to laugh at what the Glazers have done to that club and its fans, but the bigger picture dictates that what they have and still are doing to that club is rape.

Stan thinks its great and that their fans should be grateful.

Then there is this red herring he has done nothing but maintain the status quo. Laughable. Do you really believe he has only become influential since becoming majority shareholder 18 months ago? He has been a major player and board member at Arsenal since 07/08. Does anyone believe the Gazidis appointment was not at least strongly influenced by Kroenke.

The years 2007 and 8 are the years when Dein left and Kroenke joined. Nobody can tell me the direction of the club pre 2007/8 and post 07/08 was identical and that we have had nothing but status quo since.

To be opposed to the likes of Glazer, Gillette-Hicks and Kroenke is not xenophobic just because they all come from the same country.

All I'm bemused about is why people hate him when nothing's actually changed. I've heard people say it's all his fault and he's killing our club but I actually fail to see what he's done either way substantially. How would people think the last year would have played out if Kroenke didn't become majority shareholder? Do you get my drift?

Mate, this is exactly what I don't understand why some can't grasp. There are some decent points made by both 'sides' (though I'm loathe to call it that, since it's more in tune with what the 'pro-Usmanovs' want to portray the situation as), but there is also a lot of sheer ignorance, fanciful thinking, and even outright xenophobia (as bizarre as that in this situation).

The fact that nothing has changed and he hasn't done anything either way is itself a big part of the problem. The environment around us is changing rapidly and our opponents are making big moves if you stand still while your rivals are moving forward logically you will fall behind. We nearly missed out on CL football and just scraped through on the last day thanks to Spurs and Newcastle failing over the last few matches. An owner who does nothing except maintain the status quo is frankly not good enough for a club like ours that expects to challenge for the title.

Playing devils advocate for a second but what if that status quo was us winning constantly would you expect changes. Our squad as ever is just a few additions away from Championship Material and since last summer we have signed a seasoned midfielder, an experienced centre half, two top strikers and are looking to make further additions. Some might argue, playing devils advocate, that under Kroenke's watch we have got rid of players who dont want to be here (Fabregas, Nasri, NB and Arshavin (allbeit on loan)) and brought in players that do want to be here and are actually a stronger TEAM than we were before his arrival. Last season wasnt great because of the speed of changes but this season we have made additions early last seasons signings will have bedded in further and we have a good chance of challenging on our limited budget.

p.s: Im not pro Kroenke but I do think we need both him and Usmanov onboard as they have different ideas and a melting pot somewhere in the middle will be the best way forward for us.

The fact that nothing has changed and he hasn't done anything either way is itself a big part of the problem. The environment around us is changing rapidly and our opponents are making big moves if you stand still while your rivals are moving forward logically you will fall behind. We nearly missed out on CL football and just scraped through on the last day thanks to Spurs and Newcastle failing over the last few matches. An owner who does nothing except maintain the status quo is frankly not good enough for a club like ours that expects to challenge for the title.

But again why is that Kroenke's fault? It's pretty clear that the board sold to him under the condition that he would not change what was underway at Arsenal and had begun with the building of the Emirates, and that's what he's done. That's the only point I was making, and I noticed until the last page most of the antipathy had moved from Kroenke to PHW but now it's back.

Why do people hate Kroenke?

1) He is not one of us. We are probably the only club in the country who have always been run by people with a deep affection for the club. The old blue bloods from the Hill Wood-Carr-Bracewell Smith family have been involved for four generations. For all of PHW's faults I don't think anyone doubts he is an Arsenal fan through and through. The more recent power brokers like Dein and Fiszman were passionate life-long Gooners.

Its got nothing to do with background either. The old boys are of aristocratic English stock. Dein is a North London Jew who made a career out of wheeler dealing in business and then in football. Fiszman is the son of Jewish refugees from Belgium who went on to build a fortune in South Africa.Ken Friar is a local working class boy who over the course of 70(!) years worked himself up from office boy to director of his club.

For all their flaws these people are or were Arsenal.

Usmanov is not one of us either, but he has an obvious affection for the game and the club. Kroenke doesn't.

2)A1ndrew is fond of quoting Usmanov's dividend statement. How about this for some Kroenke quotes?

“What was so tough about the Glazers’ situation?” said Kroenke. “They won. And they have increased revenues by a huge amount. If I was a fan of that club I would go ’wow’. Because how could you do it any better?”

“In the States, you would never get this dialogue. He [Glazer] took money out of the club. So what? Jerry Buss [the owner of the Los Angeles Lakers] takes money out of the club. A lot of owners in the US do. No-one ever says anything about it. Did the Lakers win anything? Well, yeah, they did. How big is their revenue? Pretty darn good.”

The second quote made me laugh, because he had to use the LA Lakers as an example of a successful team. Strangely enough he couldn't use any of his own.

Apart from that bit of comedy these are disturbing comments. As Gooners its tempting to laugh at what the Glazers have done to that club and its fans, but the bigger picture dictates that what they have and still are doing to that club is rape.

Stan thinks its great and that their fans should be grateful.

Then there is this red herring he has done nothing but maintain the status quo. Laughable. Do you really believe he has only become influential since becoming majority shareholder 18 months ago? He has been a major player and board member at Arsenal since 07/08. Does anyone believe the Gazidis appointment was not at least strongly influenced by Kroenke.

The years 2007 and 8 are the years when Dein left and Kroenke joined. Nobody can tell me the direction of the club pre 2007/8 and post 07/08 was identical and that we have had nothing but status quo since.

To be opposed to the likes of Glazer, Gillette-Hicks and Kroenke is not xenophobic just because they all come from the same country.

I like your analysis but you're really giving the fans too much credit. People hate Kroenke because they're not happy with some of what's going on with our team and people need a target for their hate. Simple.

If it was a case of "not being one of us", how do you explain the initial positive interest had in Kroenke before he got onto the board or the recent rise in support for Usmanov.

Mate if you read what I've said previously, I said I don't care either way for Kroenke but would like Arsenal to see out what Fiszman and the rest of the board originally had in mind. The reason why I posted Usmanov's quotes is because people were making him to this benevolent fictional character they wanted him to be, and even went as far as denying that he even wanted dividends!

For all of PHW's faults I don't think anyone doubts he is an Arsenal fan through and through.

People have been tearing into PHW lately on this very board and routinely questioned his motives. Really think you should have a look back.

false dichotomy.

Whole thread is since the first minute.
Without it, there wouldn't be much here to go on. Even now the Prozzies (it's pro Uzzies, not prostitutes. I think ) are pretending it's "why love/don't love Kroenke". I admire the patience of those who persist, must say.

2)A1ndrew is fond of quoting Usmanov's dividend statement. How about this for some Kroenke quotes?

“What was so tough about the Glazers’ situation?” said Kroenke. “They won. And they have increased revenues by a huge amount. If I was a fan of that club I would go ’wow’. Because how could you do it any better?”

“In the States, you would never get this dialogue. He [Glazer] took money out of the club. So what? Jerry Buss [the owner of the Los Angeles Lakers] takes money out of the club. A lot of owners in the US do. No-one ever says anything about it. Did the Lakers win anything? Well, yeah, they did. How big is their revenue? Pretty darn good.”

The second quote made me laugh, because he had to use the LA Lakers as an example of a successful team. Strangely enough he couldn't use any of his own.

This is beyond tiring now. From what I've seen you have your hands full discussing Arsenal, so you should really leave the US side of sports out of it as I can tell you for certain that you're absolutely clueless about them (dangerously ignorant while trying to pass yourself off as moderately informed might be more accurate) including Kroenke's teams. And, yeah, you are xenophobic/slash have some weird insecurities when it comes to the US (this is based upon your entire corpus of posts, from the lame jokes about basketball to blanket judgements of rich Americans), which you should perhaps try to deal with elsewhere.

Your approach to this entire topic is really off-putting and your overbearing arrogance and smugness is hard to stomach; far beyond just being opinionated. In the end, however, your frenzied shouting from the ramparts of a wonky sandcastle is merely comical. Enjoy high-tide.

Perhaps the difference in views re Kroenke v Usmanov is more about any perception regarding their interaction with PHW & Co.
That Kroenke as owner represents a continuation of the passive, reactive & conservative status quo post 07/08,
whilst Usmanov has openly challenged that inactivity?

This is the size of the challenge before us...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... th-1215088

2)A1ndrew is fond of quoting Usmanov's dividend statement. How about this for some Kroenke quotes?

“What was so tough about the Glazers’ situation?” said Kroenke. “They won. And they have increased revenues by a huge amount. If I was a fan of that club I would go ’wow’. Because how could you do it any better?”

“In the States, you would never get this dialogue. He [Glazer] took money out of the club. So what? Jerry Buss [the owner of the Los Angeles Lakers] takes money out of the club. A lot of owners in the US do. No-one ever says anything about it. Did the Lakers win anything? Well, yeah, they did. How big is their revenue? Pretty darn good.”

The second quote made me laugh, because he had to use the LA Lakers as an example of a successful team. Strangely enough he couldn't use any of his own.

This is beyond tiring now. From what I've seen you have your hands full discussing Arsenal, so you should really leave the US side of sports out of it as I can tell you for certain that you're absolutely clueless about them (dangerously ignorant while trying to pass yourself off as moderately informed might be more accurate) including Kroenke's teams. And, yeah, you are xenophobic/slash have some weird insecurities when it comes to the US (this is based upon your entire corpus of posts, from the lame jokes about basketball to blanket judgements of rich Americans), which you should perhaps try to deal with elsewhere.

Your approach to this entire topic is really off-putting and your overbearing arrogance and smugness is hard to stomach; far beyond just being opinionated. In the end, however, your frenzied shouting from the ramparts of a wonky sandcastle is merely comical. Enjoy high-tide.

What does my lack of knowledge of American sport have to do with the price of fish? Its not a topic that interests me, and not one I have professed to be knowledgeable about. Its also irrelevant in the context of Arsenal FC, and more specifically its ownership structure. The only fact about American sports that I have repeatedly made reference to is that none of E.Stanley Kroenke's teams achieve very good results in their respective fields. I suspect nobody can challenge that observation.

For a definition of overbearing arrogance I refer you to Kroenke's comments about the Glazers and what they have done with Manchester United. How much more contempt is it possible to show?

If you want to interpret my repeated claim that Kroenke at Arsenal, the Glazers at United and Gillette/Hicks at Liverpool have been anything but negative for the three biggest football clubs in England as xenophobic, then thats your prerogative.Sadly it doesn't change the fact that great damage has been done. In the interest of fairness I will add that Kroenke has (so far) not created near the same amount of havoc and devastation as the owners at the other clubs.

I quite like the US, its culture and its people. I'm not a fan of their sports, but then I don't like sumo or kabbadi (sp?) either. That doesn't mean I'm xenophobic towards Japanese or Indians.

Instead of throwing around wild allegations I challenge you to name me some positives that American ownership of English football clubs has brought.

I don't think Abramovich or Mansour have been good for the game either. They have,however, been good for their clubs. Does that make me pro or anti-Russian/Arab or does it just mean I'm a concerned football fan?

This is the size of the challenge before us...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... th-1215088" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sadly we are lightyears behind the Man Utd PR machine. I remember United lining up a deal with the New York Yankees it must now be 10 years ago. They have won the European Cup and the Champions League they have continually rebuilt and redeveloped winning squads and because of that sadly for us have reached iconic status and are the pinnacle of English football, agree or disagree you cannot argue with their success. We need to catch up with them on the pitch for a sustained period back to back trophies, Champions League progress move on from the Emirates cup and really begin exploring and touring the world in the off season.

Until then we will be getting second rate deals in comparison sadly because compared to United we are a second rate team even though we remain one of the top teams in English and world football.

For all of PHW's faults I don't think anyone doubts he is an Arsenal fan through and through.

People have been tearing into PHW lately on this very board and routinely questioned his motives. Really think you should have a look back.

Yes, the people tearing into him include me. He is a buffoon at times and his motives over the last decade or so have been questionable. Nevertheless he is an Arsenal man.Kroenke certainly is not.

@draiocht fianna, I'll tell you what, instead of trying to weasel your way 'out of it' with me like you do everyone else and making stuff up on the spot and shifting around your arguments, how about you learn how to quote properly so I have one less (major) reason to come to this thread ('this' being your narcissistic pet-project formerly known as 'we want') and so avoid running the risk of reading your bullshit? All in all, I simply have no interest whatsoever in debating this with you (you don't 'debate' for starters, with anyone), my original points stand, and I'll be quietly cheering on the sane likes of and1rew, qs, and yuvken.

The years 2007 and 8 are the years when Dein left and Kroenke joined. Nobody can tell me the direction of the club pre 2007/8 and post 07/08 was identical and that we have had nothing but status quo since.

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/wp- ... ending.jpg"

Yes, the direction of the club has changed. If you compare the 4 years after the 2007-08 season and the years before it starting with 2005-06 when we moved to the Emirates at the end of it and ending in 2007-08 you'll see some very interesting things.

Our net spend for the past 4 seasons = £139492400 pounds, which means on average we spent £34873100

Our net spend for the 3 seasons from 2005-06 to 2007-08= -£6688000, which means we made a profit of £222'666 on average each season for that period.

By those numbers you can see that our spending has increased in the past few years, I think someone on the board probably Gazidis said that as the stadium debt is paid off and gets more manageable our spending will increase and it has. You only have to look at this summer to see that.

With all of that said, after looking at the Malaga situation. I've gotten even more wary of Usmanov and his intentions. The grass isn't always greener on the other side and I would rather the club continue like this for a hundred years then ever have to go through what Malaga are going through right now, owners who don't care and trying to sell the place, unpaid transfer fees, players leaving. Even Man City a few years back were on the brink, at least we all know that our club is run the right way and we are safe from that sort of thing ever happening bar a total catastrophe. To me that is more important than any trophy.