Arsenal Lobby

Can someone please explain Usmanov to me?

Why does the board oppose him?
Why are there factions of fans who think that if he were our main shareholder we'd be richer than Moneybags?

Usmanov is the 35th richest man in the world, apparently. He's a billionaire who's said that he'd inject a lot of his fortune, so people think that if he took us over, he'd be our Abramovic/Sheik Monsour. Basically, people want us to become like Chelsea/City to solve our current problems.

Sounds all well and good, but the guy has never owned a sporting brand before. He owns a lot of other companies but not one relating to any sport, let alone a football club. The board's and Wenger's methodologies and Usmanov's methodologies are diferent. The former obviously took us town the route of self-sustainability, the latter wants to screw that and throw money everywhere.

Kroenke believes in self-sustainability and owns several sporting clubs, so naturally our board took more of a shine to him.

Of course, with the modern world being obssesed with immediacy, Usmanov's billions is a much more attractive proposition to most people.

MJGunner wrote:Can someone please explain Usmanov to me?

Why does the board oppose him?
Why are there factions of fans who think that if he were our main shareholder we'd be richer than Moneybags?

Usmanov does not own many clubs like Stan does and this would make him care for Arsenal more since its his only club.

Stan dont give a shit about Arsenal just like he dont give a shit about his many other clubs he owns.

Stan is a business man who knows nothing about football and he loves Basketball and look at his team one of the worst teams in NBA. When he tool of his NFL team, the team has never been the same from one of the best turning in to one of the worst NFL teams and its has been like this for years.


If you had one car you would take good care of it but if you had 10 of them why would even bother with them?

Thanks guys.

Idk how we'd be under him but Stan is too silent for my liking. As tired of saying this I am, we'll see in the summer.

Arsenal have picked up the fewest points in the head to heads between the top seven teams in the Premier League this season (4).



:vagi:

Stan as only been our major shareholder for less then a year....and he is not our owner yet only majority shareholder

some of you guys are acting like he has been doing this forever.....who knows what he might do at the end of the season...

Yeah he's been super reassuring with all the public statements he's given. Also, the fact that all his sports teams suck is quite a relief.

MJGunner wrote:Yeah he's been super reassuring with all the public statements he's given. Also, the fact that all his sports teams suck is quite a relief.

He never gives any interviews for any of this teams.

All his teams don't suck..... Denver Nuggets held the Northwest division title in 06, 09, 10....they are currently in the run to play in the playoffs again....

Colorado Rapids, won the MLS title in 2010.... went to semi's last year

his Colorado Mammoth team won their division in 2004, 2006, 2007. and won the Championshipsin 06

American sports don't run like other sports.... you can't just splash cash, there are caps and limits there...


Unlike Arsenal his teams don't have 7-8 years droughts..... they have won or have been consistently challenging.

imalegend wrote:Stan as only been our major shareholder for less then a year....and he is not our owner yet only majority shareholder

some of you guys are acting like he has been doing this forever.....who knows what he might do at the end of the season...

How long has he been doing it to his other clubs? what is so special about Arsenal? for him they all the same.

I understand American sports and their boundaries as I'm American-Lebanese and pay attention to American sports and get their regulations.

He's owned the Nuggets since 2000. Never won a championship. Only division titles (like quarter finals). Never even won a conference title (semis)

He's had a 40% share in the St. Louis Rams since '95, they've won one Super Bowl.

I hardly take interest in comparing the Mammoths to Arsenal as lacrosse is infinitesimally insignificant compared to the NFL, NBA or EPL so that trophy is null to me.

He won a title as owner of the Avalanche (NHL) in his first season 2000-01

That's three trophies (Rams NFL, Rapids MLS, Avalanche NHL)


12 years Nuggets. No trophy.
16 years Rams. One Super Bowl. (1999)
8 years Rapids. One title. (2010)
12 years Avalanche. One title (2000-01)

That's 3 titles from four teams over 48 individual seasons. You can say I'm splitting hairs or nitpicking and that the teams show potential and what not and that there are other factors not present in these stats But on paper his track record looks awful, not nearly good enough for Arsenal especially seeing as we're on a 7 year drought.

i dont think it's fair to say he's not good enough to own/be majority shareholder of arsenal because of his track record in American sports ownership. That's comparing apples to oranges. So really there's no way to know

I do agree his agree stan's track record isn't all that impressive, but really in american sports it's highly questionable how much effect ownership has on a team's success. Typically they dont have too much input on player personnel decisions and when you're talking about an owner who owns multiple franchises, it's not like they're experts in all the sports even if they do make those decisions. They really just hire the General Managers who make the player acquisitions and the coaching hires.

that's why it's hard to say that he is or isn't the right guy to be owning the club

I posted an article shedding more light on Kroenke's ownership history a few pages back. I'll post it here again:

http://www.7amkickoff.com/2012/speculating-on-kroenkes-intentions-with-arsenal/

And the most relevant part in relation to our current discussion:

His record with these clubs in terms of trophies and investment is not that bad. In America, clubs are franchises. This means that there is profit sharing and since there is no relegation, or disincentive, there is a history of deadbeat owners who will field the minimum team required by league rules and reap the benefits of profit sharing. To an extent this is less possible these days but it still happens.

I only include that bit about deadbeats to say that in a system where someone could get away with being a deadbeat owner, Kroenke’s sports teams are not those kinds of clubs. In the ten+ years that Kroenke has owned the team The Nuggets made significant moves and investments in order to try to win an NBA title. Similarly, the Colorado Avalanche won the Stanley Cup in the season that Kroenke purchased the team and have since been in the playoffs most years.

Some people will point to the St. Louis Rams as a Kroenke cautionary tale because their last 5 years have been, well, terrible. In four of the last five seasons the Rams have averaged a record of just 2 wins and 14 losses. The one season where they did “well” they went 7-9.

But blaming Kroenke for the Rams’ terrible last five years is somewhat unfair. He was part of an ownership group up until this year. Judge him from here on out, now he’s sole owner and as such can take sole blame or credit.

GoonerJay29 wrote:Usmanov is the 35th richest man in the world, apparently. He's a billionaire who's said that he'd inject a lot of his fortune, so people think that if he took us over, he'd be our Abramovic/Sheik Monsour. Basically, people want us to become like Chelsea/City to solve our current problems.

Sounds all well and good, but the guy has never owned a sporting brand before. He owns a lot of other companies but not one relating to any sport, let alone a football club. The board's and Wenger's methodologies and Usmanov's methodologies are diferent. The former obviously took us town the route of self-sustainability, the latter wants to screw that and throw money everywhere.

Kroenke believes in self-sustainability and owns several sporting clubs, so naturally our board took more of a shine to him.

Of course, with the modern world being obssesed with immediacy, Usmanov's billions is a much more attractive proposition to most people.

Dein was the 1st one to realize it would be difficult for Arsenal to compete in the future self sustained, without back up of rich owner ( this was back in 2004-2005, evidently he was partly right). He brought Arsenal to Stan and Usmanov attention, and got screwed before Stan took over. To his bitter surprise, Stan was in it with the same mindset as the money hoarding board. You could say he got screwed twice.

Jay, I know you're in Stan camp and favor financial stability & self sustainability but sporting wise, the glaring issue has been there for 7 years and we are slipping down a slope. Just saying it as a fan who enjoys football, does that frustrate you? we all know with extra miles, things could be different.

Usmanov supporters could also make a case for him. Who to say the club will lose its financial stability & self sustainability once he takes over. His plan is not only about injecting money or getting his return, he will not run the club alone, at least Dein will be there.

Stan track record speaks for itself as MJGunner post. He's worth one sixth of Usmanov and own 5 sporting clubs that's 4 clubs too many.

Are we going into administration anytime soon? No
Are we going to miss on CL ? Very likely

Yeah again, I was just putting the stats down but yeah there are other factors that paper can't properly convey like the difference between American sports and the EPL and the fact that he's a multi-owner.

Wait. No one said Dein was part of Usmanov becoming majority shareholder...

MJGunner wrote:Wait. No one said Dein was part of Usmanov becoming majority shareholder...

He sold his shares to Red & White Holdings ( which is Usmanov) and worked with them until recently, has since quit due to his conflict with Arsenal board.

Twoism wrote:Dein was the 1st one to realize it would be difficult for Arsenal to compete in the future self sustained, without back up of rich owner ( this was back in 2004-2005, evidently he was partly right). He brought Arsenal to Stan and Usmanov attention, and got screwed before Stan took over. To his bitter surprise, Stan was in it with the same mindset as the money hoarding board. You could say he got screwed twice.

Jay, I know you're in Stan camp and favor financial stability & self sustainability but sporting wise, the glaring issue has been there for 7 years and we are slipping down a slope. Just saying it as a fan who enjoys football, does that frustrate you? we all know with extra miles, things could be different.

Usmanov supporters could also make a case for him. Who to say the club will lose its financial stability & self sustainability once he takes over. His plan is not only about injecting money or getting his return, he will not run the club alone, at least Dein will be there.

Stan track record speaks for itself as MJGunner post. He's worth one sixth of Usmanov and own 5 sporting clubs that's 4 clubs too many.

Are we going into administration anytime soon? No
Are we going to miss on CL ? Very likely

I'm not in the Stan camp, per se. I am against Usmanov, just like I am against sugar-daddy type owners overall. I'm on the fence with Kroenke, so I'm not going to sit here and criticise the guy when his regime here has only just begun. The summer will be a good starting to point for judgment, not in mid-season.

Yes, the lack of sporting success does frustrate me but there are so many variables contributing towards this it's difficult to just say "rich owner, problems solved". As a fan, I do not believe throwing money at problems is the solution and I cannot help but look at Chelsea and how they're saddled with a £50mil striker that their previous manager didn't even want; how their owner just sacks a double-winning manager due to poor performance in the Champions League.

These suggar-daddy powered clubs are not sustainable. I look at clubs like Bayern Munich and Manchester United; self-sustained clubs who enjoy lengthy periods of success. Then I look at clubs like Leeds, Portsmouth and Rangers; one who went from Champions League to League 1 in two years, one currently locked in a perpetual spell of administration and the other just entered into administration, all because they spent beyond their means to find success.

So you can see why I'm big on self-sustainability.

I can't see how you can blame our new owner for the situation we're in. He left the sporting decisions with Wenger and Wenger decided to spend the whole summer desperately trying to keep hold of two players who didn't want to be here, simultaneously ignoring the fact that squad desperately needed some new players. Would this have happened with Usmanov? Who knows? It's a complete hypothetical.

Now we're struggling to get into the top four because of that, so we'll have to wait and see what happens should we or should we not finish fourth this season.

Anyone knows how much a stadium tour at Emirates will cost ?

Sepi wrote:Anyone knows how much a stadium tour at Emirates will cost ?

Arm and leg probable.

Sepi wrote:Anyone knows how much a stadium tour at Emirates will cost ?

http://www.arsenal.com/tours

Talk about reasonable prices!

Museum is fantastic. You can spend hours there

Always wanted to go to London, definitely gonna plan a tour whenever I do go.

MJGunner wrote:Always wanted to go to London, definitely gonna plan a tour whenever I do go.

London is like every major city - can be wonderful in certain areas/times, and can be horrible in other areas/times

Overall though, it's good here.

Arsenal have thrown a protective cloak around Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, as a string of big-name firms are lining up to work with the talented youngster.

The latest are movie giants Disney, who have had a request for a photo-shoot rejected by Arsene Wenger.

The Gunners boss put his foot down because the shoot, proposed for this week, was too close to Sunday's north London derby against Tottenham.

Alongside Robin van Persie, 18-year-old Oxlade Chamberlain is one of the few bright spots in a nightmare season for the Arsenal, who look certain to end a seventh successive campaign without a trophy and face a fight to qualify for next season's Champions League.

As such, Wenger - who has developed the likes of Cesc Fabregas, Theo Walcott, Aaron Ramsey and Jack Wilshere since becoming Gunners boss in 1995 - is keen to limit The Ox's workload and media exposure.

Jenkinson: "We've been training hard this week. Everyone knows it's a big game. Everyone is up for it."