Usmanov or "Silent" Stan?

Discussion in 'Arsenal Talk' started by 23AndreyArshavin, Oct 14, 2011.

?

Are you for or against a potential takeover?

  1. For

    86 vote(s)
    93.5%
  2. Against

    6 vote(s)
    6.5%
  1. GDeep™

    GDeep™ Crohn Joss

    Not that this is all really matters, not as if he's buying Arsenal. More chance he heavily invests into Everton.

    While Everton will kick on with two adventurous billionaires, we'll be sitting in our high moral chair scraping for 4th.
     
    qwerty99, Goon_si, razörist and 6 others like this.
  2. Arsenalfaced

    Arsenalfaced Active Member

    A perception of high morals in the face of lowering standards is what I'd say.
     
  3. celestis

    celestis Arsenal-Mania Veteran Moderator

    No logic in that . two wrongs don't make a right. Football clubs especially as big as this are a reflection of society. Fans have much more influnce here than what happens World wide.
     
  4. blaze_of_glory

    blaze_of_glory Could be worse Moderator

    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  5. BobP

    BobP Favre Fan

    Wasn't Usmanov the one who wanted dividends paid? He'd be more of a leach than Kroenke who doesn't really do anything.

    However, I still prefer Usmanov. Why? Because he's a fat **** whose health I'm sure is in a terrible state. He'll buy the club, die not long after and then we'll be free of both Kroenke and Usmanov.

    At least I think that's how it works.
     
    ItWasMeBarry, BBF, razörist and 6 others like this.
  6. African Flair

    African Flair Active Member

    I just want a owner whom's vision is making Arsenal the best possible football club and since football itself is clean like the diamond industry, I couldn't care less if the man who owns Arsenal Football Club is whatever.

    If this clubs moral values is above Usmanov why the **** let him and his money in, in the first place?

    Kroenke out before Wenger.
     
    samshere likes this.
  7. blaze_of_glory

    blaze_of_glory Could be worse Moderator

    I get where you're coming from. I'm certainly no fan of Kroenke, and I agree Walmart's business practices are horrible. But Usmanov seems worse, especially at an individual level.

    It's not that Kroenke is ok, but Usmanov isn't. For me it's more that neither of them are the kind of person I want running the club, and a sale to Usmanov just takes the club even farther down a bad path, in my opinion.
     
    MutableEarth, celestis and 4R5Emaniac like this.
  8. 4R5Emaniac

    4R5Emaniac Always fresh from Bangladesh

    Even if there was proof people would find justifications, rationalize and sweep it all under the carpet just for glory hunting. Its pretty upsetting when you think about it and I'm not guilt free either.

    You know I'm actually having thoughts of giving up on football altogether or at least for a while. Observing fan behavior and most importantly my own, I feel its a waste at this stage to be so invested. I've taken things too seriously over something I have no control over and stopped enjoying it like I used to. Its become a bit toxic and tiring.

    Not to say I regret any of it, far from it, and there has been far more that I've gained than lost. However, some things hit a wall. You need to stop, step back and go another way.
     
    Makingtrax, progman07 and celestis like this.
  9. Özillionaire

    Özillionaire Well-Known Member

    I'm not that bothered but it just means that when Kroenke rejects, Usmanov will go to Everton and we will be the 6th best club in England (realistically 7th because United may be crap but they have ambition whereas we seem content to stagnate).

    Will our value continue to rise even when our performances on the pitch become more and more mediocre? Honest question.
     
  10. RoadrunnerReloaded

    RoadrunnerReloaded Well-Known Member

    Usmanov strikes me as the type that commits a crime of passion, like catching his wifey cheating and shooting the bloke in the head.

    Whereas Kroenke strikes me as the type to cut corners on safety and health regulations and then not batting an eyelid when reports come in his cost cutting resulted in unnecessary deaths and child labor.

    Usmanov's crimes might be more visceral but in the end, Kroenke's stances result in more suffering.

    I've seen that Craig Murray article before but he doesn't source anything or provide any supporting evidence for what he claims. He himself, when I read up on him, does not seem like a reliable source to me without seeing some corroborating evidence.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  11. freeglennhelder2

    freeglennhelder2 Well-Known Member

    Mate you seem convinced of his crimes.

    Reading the link @blaze_of_glory provided. The Guardian article says(re: rape allegation) "The Guardian has seen no credible evidence that supports this claim against Usmanov"

    Why are you so convinced. What's going on here? I don't give a sh*t about Usmanov but I certainly remember when Wenger joined Arsenal and people spread rumours about him that were quickly being repeated in pubs as "fact".

    However your point about wrongdoings people would accept for glory is a very interesting one. I remember being in an investment bank many years ago and one of the staff commented that their star trader made so much money for the firm that he was convinced that if the trader killed someone the bank would cover it up.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
    qwerty99 and RoadrunnerReloaded like this.
  12. samshere

    samshere Well-Known Member

    What does it matter what usmanov has done outside of football. If he saves Arsenal from stagnation he'll be nothing short of a Messiah, as far as I'm concerned. If you separate all the chaff you're left with the fact that he's just an investor and a better one than Kroenke(it would seem). Come to that even Henry Norris was accused of dubious dealings but in the end what he did was beneficial for the club. Usmanov is going to contribute funds to our cause, that's it. We're a much bigger club than Chelsea who owe their status as a top club to Abramivuch and are in no position to refuse his tantrums. I don't fear Usmanov gaining undue power at Arsenal.
     
  13. bingobob

    bingobob Wanyama Advocate

    I'm not rationalising anything. The guy done time in jail and then received a pardon which cleaned his record. If he was guilty then he served his time although after the fact he had his record cleaned. You and others can continue their witch hunt that is fine I believe in innocent until proven guilty. Usmanov hasn't been found guilty of the offences you or others accuse him off.

    On this forum we speculate and use conjecture to form opinions, some even use some data to provide evidence to their position. That's in relation to football. You're speculating on criminal matters. Let's leave it at that.
     
  14. TheEconomist

    TheEconomist Active Member

    For Stan, arsenal is one of many investments in a portfolio.

    For usmanov, its probably a vehicle for money laundering. But i doubt he cares so much about profit

    Call me immoral , i know he's an oligarch but I'd go with Usmanov. We know we aren't going anywhere with Stan

    Usmanov once proposed a rights issue ( which involved shareholders having to buy newly issues shares to raise finance for the club ) which was rejected by the board. But that shows he's willing to put money into the club .

    Its also worth noting that since Stan is American , he only cares about the USD worth of arsenal. The pound is significantly weaker now than it was when he took over, negating a fair amount of the gains he's made

    As fans, we should be doing everything we can to try and force Stan to sell
     
    qwerty99 and Arsenalfaced like this.
  15. Beany

    Beany Well-Known Member Elite

    I'd advise people against repeating some of that Craig Murray stuff; I'm no apologist for Usmanov but it's highly contentious (i.e. Libellous!) and has been the subject of much argument and prior litigation...

    I've spent years rationalising why Arsenal are above all this, why we're better that the oligarch owned mob. But I keep meeting Chelsea and Man City mugs who just laugh and walk away, waving their trophies in the air.

    We're already no better than Utd or Liverpool in the ownership stakes and we have to ask whether placing ourselves in a moral pedestal, that no one else gives a tramps chuff about, is viable or any kind of design for life.
     
  16. AVENTUS

    AVENTUS Well-Known Member

    Usmonav all day long for me. Under Him how much worse can it get.

    Under Kroenke we won't pay our top players a salary worthy of them, we ain't finishing top 4, we're nowhere near competing for the league or Champions League, we've got a board of directors who have no balls and couldn't organise a p!ss up in a Beury.

    Usmonav would change this no doubt whatsoever and signing top players wouldn't be a pipe dream.

    Kroenke can do one
     
    qwerty99 and Arsenalfaced like this.
  17. Kingslayer

    Kingslayer Prince of Twitter rumours (formerly "Marquis")

  18. Kobi

    Kobi I Know Who You Are

    You underestimated him :lol:
     
    blaze_of_glory likes this.
  19. Preacher

    Preacher Well-Known Member

    Arsenal had to use their number one mouthpiece Ornstein. With Kroenke everything is about the money.
     
  20. field442

    field442 Well-Known Member

    Quite funny how all these journos are suddenly clued up on the situation yet none of them had a ****ing clue it even happened.
     

Share This Page