Is Kroenke Holding Us Back?

[tap-in]

Lady Nina has said since that she regrets selling her shares to Kroenke. Not sure if Usmanov made her an offer or not at the time but I can imagine she was under pressure from the rest of the board re who to sell to. I definitely think Kroenke is holding us back, its good that he lets the manager get on with it but we can see flaws in Wengers approach to signings, so surely Kroenke & TBD see it too. Maybe there is some truth in "Happy with 4th"

If we fail to win the PL this season and they give Wenger another contract, it will show they are not too fussed about winning, as long as we return a profit.

 

[Nyctophobia]

Usmanov or Kroenke, both are awful, ****ing sucks.

 

[tap-in]

Usmanov or Kroenke, both are awful, ****ing sucks.

Well one we have experienced and can therefore have our say. The other, who knows, could be the best thing for all concerned, or 10 times worse than Kroenke. I guess that's the dilemma that Lady Nina faced when she had to sell.

 

[Sweggeh]

Usmanov may be an awful person, but as a football owner the signs seem positive. He is another Abramovich, a guy who wants to see his club succeed. Usmanov has come out many times, asking for us to spend more on players and achieve more on field success. He isn't happy with the status quo.

It is that **** Kroenke who is named Silent Stan for a reason. He doesn't give two ****s about the success, or lack there of, of his sports teams. You can see that with all the other sports teams he owns, 90% of them are perennial losers.

 

[Godwin1]

I can't really work out why Kroenke bought Arsenal in the first place, he doesn't fall into the categorie of an owner who loves football and wants his team to succeed and on the other hand football doesn't seem to be an ideal money maker.

 

[hydrofluoric acid]

Our business model just can't compete.

We are trying to be reasonable(which should be good) in a world where other people can throw 500 millions out of the window in less than 3 years without feeling it at all.

 

[hydrofluoric acid]

I can't really work out why Kroenke bought Arsenal in the first place, he doesn't fall into the categorie of an owner who loves football and wants his team to succeed and on the other hand football doesn't seem to be an ideal money maker.

Heard he bought it for 500-600 millions. Without any disaster to the finical climate he could probably sell it for 1000 millions to the Chinese or yeah Usmanov.

 

[Godwin1]

Heard he bought it for 500-600 millions. Without any disaster to the finical climate he could probably sell it for 1000 millions to the Chinese or yeah Usmanov.

Yeah not a bad profit there. His other teams should really speak volumes to what we can expect from him going foward. They should really have been a warning sign before he joined.

 

[Nyctophobia]

Well one we have experienced and can therefore have our say. The other, who knows, could be the best thing for all concerned, or 10 times worse than Kroenke. I guess that's the dilemma that Lady Nina faced when she had to sell.

Usmanov may be an awful person, but as a football owner the signs seem positive. He is another Abramovich, a guy who wants to see his club succeed. Usmanov has come out many times, asking for us to spend more on players and achieve more on field success. He isn't happy with the status quo.

I've read a lot about what Usmanov does and have done, he's even more shady than Kroenke, however there are no ifs or buts they're both god awful people.

And of course he's going to come out and say exactly what the fans wants to hear, don't be fooled, Usmanov is only saying whatever can win him points at Arsenal, turning the fans against Kroenke would be a big victory for him in potentially gaining more influence, these guys are vultures and they know how to play the business game.

Change just for change's sake is not the way to go in my mind, hopefully there'll be someone else who'll be interested in buying the club so that at least we'll get a different option than those two.

 

[goonerwarsh]

It would be good to be a club that genuinely wants to realise it's vast potential and not just run as a hugely profitable organisation. I think that whoever you have leading from the top, it filters down throughout the club.

I believe we lost a massive asset when David Dein left Arsenal. For all his faults, he was first and foremost absolutely an Arsenal man. I felt he was the missing link between the business side of things and the actual football side. He was a visionary bringing Wenger in at the time, the rest of the board didn't want him - and I always felt that with Dein he understood it was equally important to be delivering not just as a corporate enterprise but on the pitch. He also knew the importance of not staying still but to keep moving with the fast changing times in order to keep us competitive and most importantly winning things. Shouldn't it ultimately be about the glory? When you're coming to the end of your days do you want to have seen Arsenal win a Champions League and titles or just be happy that we've managed to at least be consistent enough to maintain an annual Champions League campaign and continue making huge financial gains.

Dein was extremely well respected at the FA and for me we stopped being quite as dynamic as a club when he left. I'm not saying we would have delivered the above success, in truth I don't think we would (though we could definitely have sneaked a few titles), but when it comes to Wenger leaving, do you have faith that anyone on the upper echelons of the club know's what to do to replace him, or even worse still, genuinely cares that much that they have a burning desire to see Arsenal reach the elite of european football?

 

[bingobob]

Our business model just can't compete.

We are trying to be reasonable(which should be good) in a world where other people can throw 500 millions out of the window in less than 3 years without feeling it at all.

I wonder why we follow rules that don't exist.

It's the equivalent of saying we'll let the opposition start the game one nil up. An unnecessary handicap.

 

[Bearded Toaster]

We are trying to be reasonable(which should be good) in a world where other people can throw 500 millions out of the window in less than 3 years without feeling it at all.

Speaking of 500m, did you read the news today about him spending that said amount on that ranch of his and all we spent was a measely 5m on Elneny!!!!

 

[Godwin1]

I've read a lot about what Usmanov does and have done, he's even more shady than Kroenke, however there are no ifs or buts they're both god awful people.

And of course he's going to come out and say exactly what the fans wants to hear, don't be fooled, Usmanov is only saying whatever can win him points at Arsenal, turning the fans against Kroenke would be a big victory for him in potentially gaining more influence, these guys are vultures and they know how to play the business game.

Change just for change's sake is not the way to go in my mind, hopefully there'll be someone else who'll be interested in buying the club so that at least we'll get a different option than those two.

So do you think Usmanov will run the club in a similar way to Kroenke? I always got the impression he'd be more of an Abrahmovic type owner.

 

[hydrofluoric acid]

Yeah not a bad profit there. His other teams should really speak volumes to what we can expect from him going foward. They should really have been a warning sign before he joined.

I remember many were happy that the corrupt bad russian(Usmanov) didn't buy the club instead we got reasonable American sport club owner. Thought it was very interesting at the time, felt most on here grew up in the western world learning Russia is bad and America is great.

 

[samshere]

I don't get this hate for Kroenke. The worst thing that he can be accused of is not investing money into Arsenal. But then, ideally a responsible football club should run on its own resources without outside help, otherwise all the accusation of Chelsea/City being oil clubs will be baseless.
As I already pointed out he's never taken out more than 3m from the business and left the sporting aspects of the club to the professionals which imo is the way things should be. Its unfair to be annoyed with him for not being an Abramovich

 

[Nyctophobia]

So do you think Usmanov will run the club in a similar way to Kroenke? I always got the impression he's more of an Abrahmovic type owner.

It's hard to say, but going from what he's said himself he'd probably fire Wenger right away unless the backlash to it is too great and he claims that he'd splash the cash on players, which in short term at least is something we'd like, but what he'd do long term that's hard to say, if he's like Abramovich we kind of know what to expect, manager rotation, not much care in youth and all that, although Usmanov comes off as more impulsive to me, but it's very hard to speculate what he'd do.

However going from what I've gathered, let me just say that if it came down to Abramovich or Usmanov I'd rather have Abramovich, I hope that speaks for itself.

 

[redwhiteAustrian]

I really couldn't give a **** about Kroenke.

 

[Gooner Zig]

The old dinosaurs on the BoD are what's holding us back, not Kroenke so much. You couldn't get a more conservative board if you even tried. Look at the average age of our BoD - pushing 70, I mean Sir ****ing Chips Keswick? Get the **** outta here - bloke probably doesn't even know what a football looks like. I'm not being ageist here but seriously some fresh blood and new ideas are needed.

It would be nice to have a board who actually challenges Wenger.

 

[Bearded Toaster]

Taking 3m out of the club for what reason? Just because he owns shares? The club is being ran like a business which isn't such a bad thing but with no money being spent on players and medical facilities needing a major overhaul then for him to put his son on the board who does exactly bugger all from what I can see and as I said already - taking 3m out of the club for what reason? Then just today I read in the news spending 500m on his ranch and we only had 5m to spend on 1 player in the transfer window????

 

[Axel_Gunner]

We will never know why exactly we didnt spent more money into players last years. Im sure Wenger plays a big part in it. I dont demant to pay 100m for a player. We got Özil or Sanchez for some money and im happy with that. This shows that we spend some money if we want to. We did not buy big last transfer windows - but this is because Wenger thought our squad is well filled.
Kroenke is not the reason we dont buy players. And i also dont want to spend money like ManCity, ManU or Chelsea did over last years. I would be happy about some more investments but not that exscessive.