People are way overreacting to this news. Kroenke was always gonna buy the rest of the shares. Its possbile to compete without a sugar daddy and our new structure is exactly what we need to compete with toyboy owners. Future looks bright and for once we actually have a manager who understands thr demands of the mordern game and prepare for his opponents meticiously to the smallest detail. Vamos Gunners 
3 Likes
I believe, in the financial world of the mega rich, this is what is technically called a lie.
1 Like
Came here to post something similar. Even if Arsenal is “fully private,” the issue of Stan stripmining the club’s assets and/or leveraging it up with a loan are overblown. The man already has more money than God. His new sports complex and the LA Rams together will be worth more than Arsenal.
The issue of Kroenke ownership is its lack of success. His American Sports franchises have achieved little on the playing field. As @Powderfinger points out, the best season of any team that he has owned was Arsenal blowing a title to Leicester.
So when fans complain on message boards about investment in the squad, transfer policy, keeping Wenger around, etc., they are failing to understand that for Kroenke, this is “success.” Arsenal as a cash cow won’t stop anytime soon with the attendance/waiting list, premier league revenue from tv, etc. Sure, Kroenke would love to have a team win a title, but he isn’t going to spend to make that happen.
Given that the EPL is rapidly turning into the other Euro leagues in which only 2 or 3 teams have a real chance to win the league, he isn’t going to put up the funds to spend and build a team capable of winning the league–it would take a Leicester like miracle for that to happen.
This whole thing is just sixty shades of wrong:
No more infighting whoever that is on the board will be focused on taking the club forward without pratting about with this Usmanov Vs Kroenke shit.
There was never any infighting. Usmanov wanted to join the board, nobody on the board wanted him to. He made absolutely no impact on Arsenal FC except for the once a year he got his face on the Daily Mail website with his “Kroenke is shit, back Wenger” statements.
If Kroenke turns out to be in the style of the Glazers so be it. So fucking many of the United fans fucking bitch and moan about it, but look how many sponsors the Glazers got from america and how their coffers have swelled since their inception.
The Glazer takeover of United has done absolutely nothing for United but cost them hundreds of millions of pounds. They’re rich because they’re Manchester United, not because they’re Glazer Soccer UK. They’re now taking £15-20m out per season as dividends and their actions resulted in something like £70m a year debt repayments for no reason. Imagine what any club could do with that much extra money, especially a few years ago when that kind of money would actually get you the best players in the world.
In all liklihood Kroenke has even more contacts than the Glazers who knows he might even be able to get walmart brands involved in some way etc
If this is even possible there’s no reason he couldn’t do any of this right now if he actually gave a shit. I don’t believe he doesn’t want Arsenal to do too well because he only owns 69% of it.
5 Likes
Worth adding to this that the Glazer takeover was for about 800m which is less than half of what’s in the mix here. If Kroenke ever begins to take money out (seems inevitable) we are completely and utterly fucked.
why would he need to take money out, he is really wealthy he doesnt need Arsenals money. Glazers though were a different kettle of fish because their other investments had tanked and Manu was their only investment really that was rolling in it.
1 Like
Got nothing to do with that.
If I am not wrong, he loaned the money from Arsenal to buy a fucking barn???
It is not about rich or not, he is just an asshole. That’s it.
This dude does not have the passion, vision… he won’t lead the club to anywhere.
I am pretty sure that is a crock of shit, the most he has taken out is about 3m a season for ‘consult fees’ or some crap like that but no fucking way did he buy a ranch off the back of arsenal.
You’re definitely wrong.
1 Like
okay, I am wrong… 
Defo wrong, his barn and his cows can F.R.O
I mean lets have some perspective here, we don’t even need to bring up what goes on in his other franchises to evaluate whether he’s going to be a good owner or not.
He’s been here since the years we had no money. You know the ones where we were sold the dream that the stadium was going to compete with Europe’s elite clubs, the fans of this football club graciously accepted the glory years were over (with some grumbling) and stumped up high ticket prices for less silverware just for this football club, our insane matched revenue which is one of the best in the world helped us navigate through that time.
The fuck was this guy doing then? He wasn’t investing in players when a Xabi Alonso was 20m, nowadays it seems any odd player to invest in if you wanna win silverware is 60-70m.
We get through that time tough phase, into an era with massive TV deals and he swoops in like a vulture to gain full ownership of this football club.
It’s that simple ain’t it, even disregarding what his american franchises are like his performance at this club hasn’t been close to acceptable.
My impression is that he won’t spend his own money, but won’t take anything out of the money the club earns… he hasn’t to date.
The only objection I have ever heard about him that I agree with is he persisted too long with AW.
The secondary but conditional objection is that he isn’t a sugar daddy (unwilling to operate at a loss) - and if this is your objection, that’s fine, but then admit you want us to contribute to financial doping in football.
Finally, one might object to appointment of Emery - to me, jury is out… not excited, but jury is out. Certainly Gazidis seems to have helped us build our international brand and straighten out our commercial revenue side.
In fairness the planning for the stadium was going on years before Stan ever bought a share/heard of Arsenal. We’ll never know what might have been if Fiszman hadn’t passed away, perhaps those promises would have been kept.
I really don’t think you can blame Kroenke for Alonso. Especially as it occurred before he was even on the board. That was a 100% Wenger decision.
1 Like
Why do this type of business at the start of the new season especially with Emery starting off blind .
What with all th added pressure now being forced on by Sky and it’s various media outlets it makes no sense .
Ridiculous.
On your second point, sorry I should’ve been clearer, Alonso was only an example, I didn’t mean he should of specifically bought him,I was pointing out that quality of player was much cheaper than it is now.
Really my point about the stadium move was a bit more emotional, he’s had a significant presence at this club for a long time and hasn’t shown much more interest other than using the club as an asset, while he was here he could’ve done something that the fans would’ve appreciated e.g invest in players, he hasn’t so fan confidence isn’t going to be too high about him being the owner.
I hear ya, the responses were a bit pointed but I think they speak to wider pints too, namely that he’s let football people run football things and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
Stan is what he is. Not what I would have picked to run Arsenal but there really isn’t any point lamenting the fact that he’s not something that he’s not. He saw a great opportunity to gain an extremely valuable asset and he took it. Even after the guy who first brought him on board realised he was a fraud.
3 Likes
I might be late to the party but wasn’t this always going to happen? It never seemed plausible that Usmanov would force Stan to sell unless there was a third party involved willing to join forces with Usmanov and offer silly money.
Yeah, all of Stan’s sports teams generally suck here in the States but I wonder if the absence of promotion, relegation and parallel competitions (like the FA Cup and European Cups) allow Stan to run his American teams in a constant state of meh. We already know he’s not going to spend money on the team and his ideal scenario is probably some version of Ajax or Valencia: minimal investment, sell players on, maybe stumble into a golden generation.
Obviously people are worried about him loading up the club with debt but I don’t know that he’s done that with his other teams.
It’s just a shame that this broke right before the season started and drained some of the good feeling out of things. Also, if he ever puts Walmart on the shirt as as sponsor I will go nuts. What a gross company.
1 Like
Genuinely don’t know the answer to this…is it allowed? Do others do it?