Arsenal Thread

Apparently, Chelsea want to get rid of either Essien or Raul Meireles.

Meireles is one of my favorite midfielders. Albeit, I haven't watched him in club football apart from MOTD highlight reels. But from Euro '08 and '12 and the general portfolio I have of him, I believe he is the perfect replacement for Song. I have no idea why Chelsea want to get rid of him.

We should go for him immediately.
 
Dos Santos supposedly is heading to Sevilla. Not that Navas, is heading out. I was asking the question, why wait for the last day? then , I remember the last minute deals :)) and surprise players sudden availability.
 
Imagine we went crazy and bought Fellaini, Llorente or Dzeko, Navas.

That would be unbelievable.....it won't happen but would be nice. Arsenal would probably have to pay ridiculous amount of money for that to happen.

For Everton to contemplate selling Fellaini we would have to pay around 25mill I reckon and to get two of the others another 35mill I reckon (Maybe 30mill if lucky).

We can dream though :))
 
Why would you want Fellaini, he's a good player but doesn't fit in at Arsenal at all.

With Walcott staying, try to wrap up Mvila and a CF and I think you'd be good to go.
 
I agree that Fellaini is excellent at Everton, but on Wenger's hands he wouldn't be the same player. Look at the amount of long balls he gets. Arsenal plays a style that wouldn't make optimum use of his strength.

Navas is excellent but to me it would be Reyes all over again. I'd rather not.

Dzeko sounds good but it's very unlikely. Wenger did like him though, wasn't Dzeko an Arsenal target during his time with Wolfsburg?

There are good players available, but instead of going for them unfortunately we're firefighting internal affairs with this Walcott thing now. I still can't get my head around just how they didn't deal with this before?

If he's not happy with £75k a week then it won't get any better for either part. He's an underachiever, let's face it. £75k would have been already an extravagant offer.
I don't like him staying one bit. He's quite sneeky, not having signing this deal and letting it linger to his final year.

We don't know what's really going on, but if there's any truth to the reports of Wenger trusting him to a sign a deal after the deadline, then I'd be very disappointed. If footballer's recent behaviour is anything to go by, he shouldn't be trusted. Wasn't Cashley Cole doing the same thing?
 
Think Fellaini would be good for us :)) He is strong and will give us an extra dimension.

How do you know who we are and aren't going for Rentboy?

Also we have already brought good players in, you make it sound like we haven't got anybody in?

The Walcott thing is strange, but it is all paper talk at the moment and we really do not know what is going on.

I think Walcott maybe thought he would have many clubs after him and he also used the Van Persie and Song departures to try and get more out of the club.

In the end he has found out that there are probably only two clubs after him, one isn't in the champs league and the other can win lots of things, but he will not hardly play.

I think he wants to play for us, but was trying to get a ridiculous deal out of us and after realising that it isn't working, he has backed down as staying at Arsenal is his best option.

They can't arrange anything now, because it is right on the transfer deadline and Wenger probably doesn't have much time (I would like to think he is busy at the moment :)) ).

So I would rather wait and see.
 
Rentboy said:
Wasn't Cashley Cole doing the same thing?
Click to expand...

In his autobiography he stated he nearly crashed his car when he heard he was getting £50k instead of £55k.

Now if you're earning £400 a week, and you are denied at 10% rise, you'd be pretty pissed. But earning more in a week than some people earn in a year isn't going to damage you financially now is it?

I guess it was the perfect cover he needed for the move the Chelsea. Especially after being filmed with Mourinho coming out of a restaurant, and then being subsequently fined for tapping up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/4596209.stm
 
BobbyBox said:
How do you know who we are and aren't going for Rentboy?

Also we have already brought good players in, you make it sound like we haven't got anybody in?
Click to expand...

It's an assumption, Bob. The club officials (Gazidis, Dick Law or whoever it was) talking to Walcott wasn't enough. From every source we read, it seems Wenger stopped whatever he was doing and talking to Theo himself.

As for the good players be brought early, I was very pleased with that, but I thought it was actually investment. You know, adding to the squad. I was counting on RvP leaving and that was ok, but when Song left and we don't seem to be moving for a replacement, now that's a disappointment.

Of course something could be done in the next 36 hours, but the question remains: why leave it up until now? Both Walcott's situation and reinforcements.


IceMan_Bergkamp said:
In his autobiography he stated he nearly crashed his car when he heard he was getting £50k instead of £55k.

Now if you're earning £400 a week, and you are denied at 10% rise, you'd be pretty pissed. But earning more in a week than some people earn in a year isn't going to damage you financially now is it?

I guess it was the perfect cover he needed for the move the Chelsea. Especially after being filmed with Mourinho coming out of a restaurant, and then being subsequently fined for tapping up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/4596209.stm
Click to expand...

Nearly crashed? :LOL:
Football players are a disgrace. I'll concede that Arsenal didn't handle the situation very well, but his old wages were equivalent to £2.6m a year. This is already ridiculous money for anyone.
 
Rentboy said:
It's an assumption, Bob. The club officials (Gazidis, Dick Law or whoever it was) talking to Walcott wasn't enough. From every source we read, it seems Wenger stopped whatever he was doing and talking to Theo himself.

As for the good players be brought early, I was very pleased with that, but I thought it was actually investment. You know, adding to the squad. I was counting on RvP leaving and that was ok, but when Song left and we don't seem to be moving for a replacement, now that's a disappointment.

Of course something could be done in the next 36 hours, but the question remains: why leave it up until now? Both Walcott's situation and reinforcements.
Click to expand...

It isn't a great idea to assume things though, especially as most papers barely get information correct and write a lot of stuff that isn't true.

Why don't we seem to be moving for a replacement? because the papers don't say we are?

They don't just leave their transfer dealings up until now (as our other summer buys prove) I'm sure that they would prefer to do things early, but they aren't the only ones involved.

Why do any teams buy players in the last days/hours of the transfer window? because there are so many factors to be sorted out, some teams like to know where other players are going before they buy/release other players, some teams need to sell players before they are willing to buy and vice versa etc etc etc. Most teams and players leave it to the last moment to get the best deals, what can Arsenal do about that?

With Walcott they have been trying to sort out his contract for the last two years (From what I have heard) and Walcott and his representatives have been stalling (you yourself have stated the same) so what were Arsenal supposed to do? Just sell him after putting so much time and money into him? If there is hope of getting him to stay, seeing a return on the huge investment we have put into him and not selling him to other Prem league clubs (Which are the only clubs interested), then Arsenal need to do what they are doing.

I keep having this conversation with you and you keep saying the same, 'why didn't they do this sooner? why didn't they do that?'. The truth is Arsenal aren't god and can't just make things happen, there are many parties involved and it is very difficult to buy players, re-sign players, sell players etc etc etc.

We seem to think it is just Arsenal because we support them, but it happens to many other clubs as well.
 
If a bid comes in for Walcott - and it might from LFC - he will be sold.

Arsenal said they weren't selling (insert name here) and they always do.

Walcott can join another team from 01-01-13 so it's either £15m now or nothing in Jan
 
BobbyBox said:
It isn't a great idea to assume things though, especially as most papers barely get information correct and write a lot of stuff that isn't true.

Why don't we seem to be moving for a replacement? because the papers don't say we are?

They don't just leave their transfer dealings up until now (as our other summer buys prove) I'm sure that they would prefer to do things early, but they aren't the only ones involved.

Why do any teams buy players in the last days/hours of the transfer window? because there are so many factors to be sorted out, some teams like to know where other players are going before they buy/release other players, some teams need to sell players before they are willing to buy and vice versa etc etc etc. Most teams and players leave it to the last moment to get the best deals, what can Arsenal do about that?

With Walcott they have been trying to sort out his contract for the last two years (From what I have heard) and Walcott and his representatives have been stalling (you yourself have stated the same) so what were Arsenal supposed to do? Just sell him after putting so much time and money into him? If there is hope of getting him to stay, seeing a return on the huge investment we have put into him and not selling him to other Prem league clubs (Which are the only clubs interested), then Arsenal need to do what they are doing.

I keep having this conversation with you and you keep saying the same, 'why didn't they do this sooner? why didn't they do that?'. The truth is Arsenal aren't god and can't just make things happen, there are many parties involved and it is very difficult to buy players, re-sign players, sell players etc etc etc.

We seem to think it is just Arsenal because we support them, but it happens to many other clubs as well.
Click to expand...

With Walcott it could have been done before. If he really wanted to stay he would have already signed.
As I said, if Walcott refused £75k a week (the best deal he's gonna get at Arsenal) I don't see any chance of this negotiation improving.
We know he will be able to get more money if he moves on a Bosman and we know how footballers look out for themselves only.

I'm just saying that if the deadline goes by, there's a high likelihood that Arsenal will get £0 for him. That's why I think Arsenal should have forced a solution to this problem before. Even if he was to be sold by £12m, allowing us to at least recoup the value of his transfer in 2006.

Letting him enter the final year of his contract is not in the best interests of the club.

PS: He wouldn't go for free in January, because his contract is until next summer.
 
Rentboy said:
With Walcott it could have been done before. If he really wanted to stay he would have already signed.
As I said, if Walcott refused £75k a week (the best deal he's gonna get at Arsenal) I don't see any chance of this negotiation improving.
We know he will be able to get more money if he moves on a Bosman and we know how footballers look out for themselves only.

I'm just saying that if the deadline goes by, there's a high likelihood that Arsenal will get £0 for him. That's why I think Arsenal should have forced a solution to this problem before. Even if he was to be sold by £12m, allowing us to at least recoup the value of his transfer in 2006.

Letting him enter the final year of his contract is not in the best interests of the club.

PS: He wouldn't go for free in January, because his contract is until next summer.
Click to expand...

My post before was highlighting a different situation (Which could have happened, we know nothing different, there could be many scenarios), one where he tried to get more money, in a way was blagging and using Song and Van Persie situation to try and back us into a corner as we wouldn't want to let him go. But we stuck to our guns and he has now realised he isn't going to get the sum he wanted, plus the clubs that are in for him aren't ideal, so wants to stay.

He can't arrange anything now, because it is the end of the transfer deadline, but he has said that they will sort something out. So who knows they might go for 80k a week and both sides will be happy. Arsenal pay a bit more and Walcott still gets a considerable rise.

Is getting 12m for a player we paid that price for 6 years ago really a good deal? We still have lost the millions we have paid to him and time invested in him over that 6years, which is just as valuable. You have to take risks, if this one goes well, we keep a player that Wenger has nurtured for the last few years and will hopefully go on to bigger and better things, or at least if he wants to go in a couple of years we can get more money for him.

You seem to be contradicting your self a bit from earlier posts as well, saying that Arsenal are doing everything from a business point of view and we need to start investing all the money that we receive etc etc. We need to start thinking about the club on the football field? (rough round about summary of what you were saying).

I think you are contradicting yourself because if Wenger keeps Walcott for a year at least we have him for a year and our squad is stronger for this year, enhancing our chances of winning (Especially if Wenger can't find a replacement?)

If we sell him now, we are just getting the money again, no improvement to the team, but only the bank balance.

PS Who said that he would go for free in January?
 
BobbyBox said:
My post before was highlighting a different situation (Which could have happened, we know nothing different, there could be many scenarios), one where he tried to get more money, in a way was blagging and using Song and Van Persie situation to try and back us into a corner as we wouldn't want to let him go. But we stuck to our guns and he has now realised he isn't going to get the sum he wanted, plus the clubs that are in for him aren't ideal, so wants to stay.

He can't arrange anything now, because it is the end of the transfer deadline, but he has said that they will sort something out. So who knows they might go for 80k a week and both sides will be happy. Arsenal pay a bit more and Walcott still gets a considerable rise.

Is getting 12m for a player we paid that price for 6 years ago really a good deal? We still have lost the millions we have paid to him and time invested in him over that 6years, which is just as valuable. You have to take risks, if this one goes well, we keep a player that Wenger has nurtured for the last few years and will hopefully go on to bigger and better things, or at least if he wants to go in a couple of years we can get more money for him.

You seem to be contradicting your self a bit from earlier posts as well, saying that Arsenal are doing everything from a business point of view and we need to start investing all the money that we receive etc etc. We need to start thinking about the club on the football field? (rough round about summary of what you were saying).

I think you are contradicting yourself because if Wenger keeps Walcott for a year at least we have him for a year and our squad is stronger for this year, enhancing our chances of winning (Especially if Wenger can't find a replacement?)

If we sell him now, we are just getting the money again, no improvement to the team, but only the bank balance.

PS Who said that he would go for free in January?
Click to expand...

SteelHorse75 said that in the post above mine. Sorry if you were confused by that :D

I don't think I'm contradicting myself, although I lost a lot of faith that there would be immediate reinvestment with money made on transfers. I still think its wrong to run the risk of losing him for free.

Selling him for £12m is far from ideal, but better than losing him on a free. At least we recoup the value, whilst his development wasn't always a burden, but he had his good moments and made a good contribution at times.

This option you suggested, of letting him stay 1 final year just to make our squad stronger is the worst case scenario. If you said that about Van Persie I would agree. But what difference will Walcott really make, when he's not even a first XI regular?

Mind you that I'm talking about recouping money here only on the basis of looking at Arsenal's best interests. Whether this money will be reinvested in the squad or go to Kroenke's pockets, is another story.

What I'm really annoyed is that it looks as though we sold Song and RvP to cover for the costs of Giroud, Poldi and Santi.
You asked me why do I think we're not moving for players, and if it's solely based on what I read on papers. Well here's the thing, I don't have any privileged information and I know as much as anyone else here. But what I do know is that Spurs signed Moussa Dembele (one of the most improved midfielders in the league) for £15m immediately after selling Modric to Madrid for double the price!
Meanwhile, Gazidis and Co are sitting on the £37m from Song and RvP. Just watching other clubs snatch good deals.
As it stands we're heading for another transfer window closing with a profit on transfers.
So unless they come up with a landmark signing no one could see coming, I'll be very disappointed once again with the club's transfer dealings.
 
Rentboy said:
SteelHorse75 said that in the post above mine. Sorry if you were confused by that :D

I don't think I'm contradicting myself, although I lost a lot of faith that there would be immediate reinvestment with money made on transfers. I still think its wrong to run the risk of losing him for free.

Selling him for £12m is far from ideal, but better than losing him on a free. At least we recoup the value, whilst his development wasn't always a burden, but he had his good moments and made a good contribution at times.

This option you suggested, of letting him stay 1 final year just to make our squad stronger is the worst case scenario. If you said that about Van Persie I would agree. But what difference will Walcott really make, when he's not even a first XI regular?

Mind you that I'm talking about recouping money here only on the basis of looking at Arsenal's best interests. Whether this money will be reinvested in the squad or go to Kroenke's pockets, is another story.

What I'm really annoyed is that it looks as though we sold Song and RvP to cover for the costs of Giroud, Poldi and Santi.
You asked me why do I think we're not moving for players, and if it's solely based on what I read on papers. Well here's the thing, I don't have any privileged information and I know as much as anyone else here. But what I do know is that Spurs signed Moussa Dembele (one of the most improved midfielders in the league) for £15m immediately after selling Modric to Madrid for double the price!
Meanwhile, Gazidis and Co are sitting on the £37m from Song and RvP. Just watching other clubs snatch good deals.
As it stands we're heading for another transfer window closing with a profit on transfers.
So unless they come up with a landmark signing no one could see coming, I'll be very disappointed once again with the club's transfer dealings.
Click to expand...

Dembele is a very good player, but he isn't close to Modric in ability imo that is why he cost half the price, so I don't get why you mentioned double the double the price thing?

If it was to go against Arsenal it would have been a better argument if they would have spent all of the money from Modric on a truly world class midfielder to replace Modric?

I also don't get how they are sitting on 37mill from Song and Van Persie, just because they bought Giroud, podolski and Cazorla before? So what if we sold Song and Van Persie before and then bought the other 3 in?

What I am trying to get at is they are spending the money they are getting in, I think I mentioned they have spent I think nearly 90million over the last two seasons on players, how much have we received on selling players in that time?

It would be good to know 25mill for Van Persie, 15mill for Song, 35mill for Fab, 25mill for Nasri, who else did we sell last season? that is 100million sold in the last two seasons and we have spent 90mill. So this huge amount of money we aren't investing is 10mill? is that right?

I don't know if my sums are right, because I just did it quickly, but I don't think it is that far off, so are we really not investing our money?


EDIT: Not a bad group for us in the Champs league :))....Hopefully anyway!

B: Arsenal, Schalke, Olympiakos, Montpellier
 
Last edited:
BobbyBox said:
Dembele is a very good player, but he isn't close to Modric in ability imo that is why he cost half the price, so I don't get why you mentioned double the double the price thing?

If it was to go against Arsenal it would have been a better argument if they would have spent all of the money from Modric on a truly world class midfielder to replace Modric?

I also don't get how they are sitting on 37mill from Song and Van Persie, just because they bought Giroud, podolski and Cazorla before? So what if we sold Song and Van Persie before and then bought the other 3 in?

What I am trying to get at is they are spending the money they are getting in, I think I mentioned they have spent I think nearly 90million over the last two seasons on players, how much have we received on selling players in that time?

It would be good to know 25mill for Van Persie, 15mill for Song, 35mill for Fab, 25mill for Nasri, who else did we sell last season? that is 100million sold in the last two seasons and we have spent 90mill. So this huge amount of money we aren't investing is 10mill? is that right?

I don't know if my sums are right, because I just did it quickly, but I don't think it is that far off, so are we really not investing our money?


EDIT: Not a bad group for us in the Champs league :))....Hopefully anyway!

B: Arsenal, Schalke, Olympiakos, Montpellier
Click to expand...

No Bobby, your sum is roughly about right. Just forgot maybe Clichy, whose value I don't remember.
We are on the same page then. The only difference being that you find it acceptable to have a £10m profit in transfers, while I don't. For this team to be really competitive we cannot afford to keep profiting on transfers. Not even Wenger can work that kind of magic.

What saddens me the most is that we're between a rock and a hard place. I don't like Usmanov one bit, and I'd like to support Kroenke in this current board. But by doing what they're doing, they just keep giving Usmanov more ammunition!! I was expecting Arsenal's board to shut Jabba The Hutt's mouth by making a real investment in the team. If they did that, Stan remain be as silent as he wants. But they're not doing themselves any favours, as they're not exactly endearing to fans right now.

I mentioned Dembele because he is a fantastic player, Bobby. Even if he's half the price of Modric, the point I'm trying to make is that it was a great deal. You don't have to break the bank to make the team stronger.
Let's look at this in another way: Dembele's fee is exactly the same we got for Song. How about that, would you say it would be a bad deal for Arsenal?

Whether we sold RvP and Song before or after buying our 3 new guys, it doesn't make a difference to me. They're profiting on transfers, when our squad already lacked the quality to compete for the league.

For many fans though, it does make a difference: by buying first, selling later, they're selling a lie to the public. Make no mistake: the squad, as it is right now, is not stronger than last year's.

As for the CL group, I was pleased with the draw. But let's not get too cocky, these teams aren't to be underestimated. We've seen Arsenal finish second to Shakhtar Donetsk a couple seasons ago.
 
Rentboy said:
No Bobby, your sum is roughly about right. Just forgot maybe Clichy, whose value I don't remember.
We are on the same page then. The only difference being that you find it acceptable to have a £10m profit in transfers, while I don't. For this team to be really competitive we cannot afford to keep profiting on transfers. Not even Wenger can work that kind of magic.

What saddens me the most is that we're between a rock and a hard place. I don't like Usmanov one bit, and I'd like to support Kroenke in this current board. But by doing what they're doing, they just keep giving Usmanov more ammunition!! I was expecting Arsenal's board to shut Jabba The Hutt's mouth by making a real investment in the team. If they did that, Stan remain be as silent as he wants. But they're not doing themselves any favours, as they're not exactly endearing to fans right now.

I mentioned Dembele because he is a fantastic player, Bobby. Even if he's half the price of Modric, the point I'm trying to make is that it was a great deal. You don't have to break the bank to make the team stronger.
Let's look at this in another way: Dembele's fee is exactly the same we got for Song. How about that, would you say it would be a bad deal for Arsenal?

Whether we sold RvP and Song before or after buying our 3 new guys, it doesn't make a difference to me. They're profiting on transfers, when our squad already lacked the quality to compete for the league.

For many fans though, it does make a difference: by buying first, selling later, they're selling a lie to the public. Make no mistake: the squad, as it is right now, is not stronger than last year's.

As for the CL group, I was pleased with the draw. But let's not get too cocky, these teams aren't to be underestimated. We've seen Arsenal finish second to Shakhtar Donetsk a couple seasons ago.
Click to expand...

But I don't think they are really thinking, wow we made 10million pounds! 10million is nothing in this day and age in football. They have 10million because they just have it, they bought players and they sold players and they happen to have 10million less. It sounds like we are after maybe one or two more as well by all reports, so we could go over that.

But of course we may sell Arshavin, Bendtner and a couple of others, then we will be back in profit again. That is just the way it goes.

You keep going on about how we need to spend more than we are making in transfers, but apart from the sugar daddy clubs 90million in two seasons is a hell of an outlay.

Dembele is a great player, but yet to be seen how he plays in a 'bigger' team. So many players look great in middle prem teams and then fail making the step up (Not that Spurs are that big a step :PP ) I trust Wenger and he must of had his reasons not to go for him, Wenger isn't stupid.

I just get fed up of people saying we aren't investing the money when we clearly are.

The way you say 'they are selling a lie' is so sensationalist :LOL: you make it sound like they bought them in early to trick the supporters?

What lie are they selling as well? they have spent lots of money on experienced players, that is what people have been crying out for, they have done it, but it still isn't good enough.

I don't think we are giving Usmanov any ammunition, as we are spending alot of money on quality players imo and they are making investment in the team.

on the champs league we should get through it, but only if we play at our best. Those teams are all capable of beating us on their day....but I don't think so if we are on our day as well :DD
 
Wow, tough month ahead. Liverpool away Sunday, Man City Away, finishing with Chelsea at home....we need to start putting away some goals! :DD

We also have Southampton at home and Montpellier away....and also the Carling cup (or whatever it is called now?!).

Busy and tough month, I really hope we do well, I can't take another season of doom and gloom!
 
BobbyBox said:
But I don't think they are really thinking, wow we made 10million pounds! 10million is nothing in this day and age in football. They have 10million because they just have it, they bought players and they sold players and they happen to have 10million less. It sounds like we are after maybe one or two more as well by all reports, so we could go over that.

But of course we may sell Arshavin, Bendtner and a couple of others, then we will be back in profit again. That is just the way it goes.

You keep going on about how we need to spend more than we are making in transfers, but apart from the sugar daddy clubs 90million in two seasons is a hell of an outlay.

Dembele is a great player, but yet to be seen how he plays in a 'bigger' team. So many players look great in middle prem teams and then fail making the step up (Not that Spurs are that big a step :PP ) I trust Wenger and he must of had his reasons not to go for him, Wenger isn't stupid.

I just get fed up of people saying we aren't investing the money when we clearly are.

The way you say 'they are selling a lie' is so sensationalist :LOL: you make it sound like they bought them in early to trick the supporters?

What lie are they selling as well? they have spent lots of money on experienced players, that is what people have been crying out for, they have done it, but it still isn't good enough.

I don't think we are giving Usmanov any ammunition, as we are spending alot of money on quality players imo and they are making investment in the team.

on the champs league we should get through it, but only if we play at our best. Those teams are all capable of beating us on their day....but I don't think so if we are on our day as well :DD
Click to expand...

£10m in profit or £10m in the red wouldn't make a difference to Arsenal or many other PL clubs, I agree. But this difference can be translated into a £20m rated signing (which we are all hoping for). But I just don't see the point of hoping for that, as the deadline is closing in, we would be fighting for scraps.

When you talk about a £90m outlay... Dude! Fabregas and Nasri were sold for a combined £60m! They're not investing in the team. They are reinvesting. I think we cannot call it an outlay, unless it's a one-way traffic and doesn't involve selling our best players every season.

I don't know the ins and outs of our stadium debt, but it should be stabilizing by now. It's been 6 years.
As long as we keep balancing the books in terms of transfers, we will never have a chance to truly compete for the league title.

Our only chance was to use Wenger's expertise and spend on the right players to get closer to the richest teams. But we're not exactly spending. It's only reinvesting. Recycling.

I think Kroenke is an investor. He's not here to develop the club and make it bigger, make it win things. He came in to make money. It's what it looks so far.
He's got the same attachment to Arsenal as I'd have to a blue chip company if I decided to invest in the stock market. The man doesn't even dignify with speeches or press conferences.
 
Kroenke is getting a lot of bad press but how many other club owners are chatting away in the media every week? Every month? I don't really see it happening that much at other clubs?

It is other peoples job to talk to he media and the fans, unless there is a crisis and I know a lot of fans like to exaggerate and think we are in a crisis, we are ridiculously far from that.
 
Well if one of the owners (Usmanov) having a go at Kroenke like he did with that open statment (airing dirty laundry to whoever wants to see) isn't a crisis, then I don't know what it is! :LOL:

I'm not hoping for Kroenke to speak monthly. But the guy never says anything, never releases statements, not even in response to those accusations! Kroenke is just an investor, and his give-a-fuck-o-meter is set to the max.

EDIT: As we speak, Tottenham are close to sign Moutinho and Lloris (a keeper we've been previously linked with). M'Vila is bound to be signed by City. What are they doing? Gazidis??

It's very annoying to be an Arsenal fan right now. How come the club with the most expensive ticket in the league is running their business so shoddily?
 
Last edited:
Rentboy said:
Well one of the owners (Usmanov) having a go at Kroenke like he did with that open statment (airing dirty laundry to whoever wants to see) isn't a crisis, then I don't know what it is! :LOL:

I'm not hoping for Kroenke to speak monthly. But the guy never says anything, never releases statements, not even in response to those accusations! Kroenke is just an investor, and his give-a-fuck-o-meter is set to the max.
Click to expand...

Why does he need to respond to a big fat prick? A lot of fans said bad things about Arsenal and the way we are going, should he speak every time a fan says something? (Because for me the fan talking is a lot more important than that sack of shit). Also why should he talk every time a certain group of fans go crazy? because the fans do not know probably 5% of what is going on at Arsenal.

I think his silence shows that he has every faith in the people he has in charge of the club and he isn't worried one bit as he trusts Wenger et al to do their jobs. I think in a way that is a positive.

I think most people saw that open statement for what it was and Kroenke didn't need to say a thing, I think it back fired on Uzmanov completely because it showed his true colours.

And I really don't see why someones opinion in an open statement is classed as a crisis?

Again, he pays people to talk on his behalf, what is the point of him coming out and saying the same things he has discussed with Gazidis for example?

I really don't see the importance of him speaking? We have many more problems, but this seems to be one of those things the press likes to pick up on, that really doesn't matter in the grande scheme of things.
 
I really think we can't sit around with our thumb up are arse at the deadline. I look around and see Spurs signing decent players, Man. City as always are. We definitely need some new faces on the pitch. Let's hope we see a few deals come our way.
 
BobbyBox said:
Why does he need to respond to a big fat prick? A lot of fans said bad things about Arsenal and the way we are going, should he speak every time a fan says something? (Because for me the fan talking is a lot more important than that sack of shit). Also why should he talk every time a certain group of fans go crazy? because the fans do not know probably 5% of what is going on at Arsenal.

I think his silence shows that he has every faith in the people he has in charge of the club and he isn't worried one bit as he trusts Wenger et al to do their jobs. I think in a way that is a positive.

I think most people saw that open statement for what it was and Kroenke didn't need to say a thing, I think it back fired on Uzmanov completely because it showed his true colours.

And I really don't see why someones opinion in an open statement is classed as a crisis?

Again, he pays people to talk on his behalf, what is the point of him coming out and saying the same things he has discussed with Gazidis for example?

I really don't see the importance of him speaking? We have many more problems, but this seems to be one of those things the press likes to pick up on, that really doesn't matter in the grande scheme of things.
Click to expand...

I agree he shouldn't be answering to anyone's criticism. That would be crazy. But whether you like it or not, the fat prick isn't just anyone, the guy just happens to own 29% of Arsenal. You can't ignore that.

Plus, he released a statement right after RvP's. So there was a obviously a crisis.
There was also that story about Gazidis cold calling one telecoms company in Russia for sponsorship, without knowing Usmanov owns that company. I mean, there were some things happening that looked more like amateur hour. Gazidis is a man completely out of his depth IMO.

After all that, fans were appeased by the signing of Cazorla, but RvP and Song leaving, and now this mismanaged Walcott situation, just brings everything under the microscope again.
 
Rentboy said:
I agree he shouldn't be answering to anyone's criticism. That would be crazy. But whether you like it or not, the fat prick isn't just anyone, the guy just happens to own 29% of Arsenal. You can't ignore that.

Plus, he released a statement right after RvP's. So there was a obviously a crisis.
There was also that story about Gazidis cold calling one telecoms company in Russia for sponsorship, without knowing Usmanov owns that company. I mean, there were some things happening that looked more like amateur hour. Gazidis is a man completely out of his depth IMO.

After all that, fans were appeased by the signing of Cazorla, but RvP and Song leaving, and now this mismanaged Walcott situation, just brings everything under the microscope again.
Click to expand...

He can't ignore it and he would have read it and did whatever he wants with it, but it still doesn't make any difference. Just because he didn't come out and say anything after it, doesn't mean he just ignored it.

The letter should make us think that we should be glad that Uzmanov is not the majority shareholder as his petty one up manship is clearly contradicting himself in that he says he wants the best for the club. Also the fact that David Dean is strongly connected with them and his son does his very best to organise moves away from Arsenal for all of our best players. Anyone with a bit of sense can see what they are trying to do and it isn't for the best of Arsenal it is for the best for them.

If this open letter happened with a well respected member of the board, then it would be a bit of a crisis and would make me think harder about it. But once you know it is from Uzmanov, you have to take it for what it is and that is a great big fat piece of propaganda for the interests of Uzmanov and nobody else.

You say because he released the statement after Van Persie shows it is 'obviously' a crisis? why? it was obviously orchestrated by Uzmanov to be that way and as I said backfired on him and Van Persie. There was no crisis, but Uzmanov wanted there to be one for sure.

The only crisis I can foresee is Uzmanov having a controlling share in Arsenal and it seems like they are trying to stop that as much as possible which is a great thing imo.

The statement about Gazidis calling the Russian company is below and we have only heard it from Uzmanovs corner, which should be taken with a huge pinch of salt and it was designed to undermine Gazidis.

*'Secondly, OJSC MegaFon (Russia) received a cold call letter from Mr Gazidis requesting a meeting to discuss a possible international partnership deal including shirt sponsorship. MegaFon is one of the three largest mobile phone companies in Russia and also happens to be over 50% owned by Alisher Usmanov. Is this really the level of professionalism that is being applied to securing long-term commercial contracts?'

I don't know about you, but other businesses I have been in, when you show interest in a company you look at the basics/fundamentals of what you need and then ask if they would like to meet to discuss. If they accept, then you look much further into the company and how they are formed and what is behind the scenes. There is no point wasting time and energy searching about every detail of a company before you even know if they will be interested in speaking to you?

Anyway, I always counter because I don't like people to just believe one side of a story or a news article or an opinion. There could be many reasons why things are happening the way they are.

I also think fans should be appeased by the signings of Podolski and Giroud as well as Cazorla? I think you keep forgetting about them because they haven't lit up the world in their first two games.

The Walcott situation I have mentioned a couple of times in the last page or so and as you know I don't think it is mismanaged, because I understand why they are in this position and 95% goes to Walcott and his associates and I think Arsenal have done the right thing personally.

Especially if there was no chance of getting a replacement for him before the transfer deadline and even if we could, Walcott has all the experience in the prem. Who is to say how long a new person would take to settle in?....and we have a very tough month up ahead and we need the team as settled as possible.

I really do think your reasonings are tainted by exact print of what papers and other people who really don't know what is going on say, rather than thinking about things more broadly and asking yourself, why are they doing this? what could the other reasons be? etc

Because if I have learned anything, it is not to trust the papers and not to trust Big Fat Uzbekistani Billionaires ;))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom