DJ I thought Emirates was restricted to 60k seats due to lack of local planning permission? Otherwise I'm sure the current board would do as you suggest

V

Apparently it can go to 100k.

This is very bad news, if they buy out Stan AND Usmanov, then all the small share holders will legally HAVE to sell their shares and give them 100% ownership of the club.

Would be better if they just brought out Stan, I dont think the club should be 100% owned by one person/company.

Intresting Magic Hat. Personally I'd love for it to happen.

It does say if stan says yes but usmanov no, they will work together, but if stan says no then its a no go.

Transport would be the issue, I believe, and we would have to pay multi millions to update the nearby tube stations suc as Holloway Road.

This is very bad news, if they buy out Stan AND Usmanov, then all the small share holders will legally HAVE to sell their shares and give them 100% ownership of the club.
---

I agree that is one fundamental downside to this (theoretical) move, but for now, this news is purely speculation. We don't know how much truth there is to this.

We don't know how much truth there is to this.
-
4 different news outlets reporting. if false, one source is in major sheet.

Seems like the wrong time to be going down this route. FFP are finally looking like happening.

That said, I would lovvve to see the back of Kroenke.

Tough call.

There must be some kind of creditiibilty with the source. It's certainly not complete BS.

stan hasnt put a penny in. has took some out apparently. will make 350m. not a bad investment for him.

Stan has no affiliation with the club. He didn't support them or anything and has been in it to make a profit.

Why wouldn't you sell up in his shoes?

I very much doubt they are actually fans of the club though, more likely they have seen what the prestige and fame of owning a football club brings you; like the Sheiks at City and Abramovich at Chelsea, and want their own slice of the action.

IMO this move could do more good than bad. People might say that these owners may not take the fans' sentiments into consideration, but it's not as if the current board do anyway.

Also to people saying what if we turned out like City/Chelsea:

Hyperthetically speaking, what if we did sign the likes of Cavani, Gotze etc, would you be complaining?

i cant see it doing bad. there is talk of taking out all debt. investing in squad. not selling players. wanting to win CL and compete with big boys. not wanting to be like liverpool. and considering fans and reducing prices. cant see any negatives TBH.

Mix feeling if this is true

On one side we are the only club that is runed how every club should be and actually making profit, so why become relying on billionaire money like Chelsea and Man City. We will then become just like them and will be getting a lot of stick. Also I don't like the fact they want 100% control over the club.

However they do look to have more ambition than Stan and the reason they say they want are good e.g reduce ticket prices.

One thing for sure is I hope it's true (not meaning them to take over), so we can really see the true Stan and see if he cares about the club or will bite the Arab investors for the 350m

Btw what actually went wrong at Malaga?

one negative i can think of actually, is that it means the last 8 years of penny saving for the future etc has been a waste of time and we could have invested more and kept fab/van persie etc.

Woah! This is a tough one. There are positives, and there a fundamental negatives.

Btw what actually went wrong at Malaga?
-
owners got bored and decided not to pay anything like debts, player fees etc.

Look the only negative I can see is a moral one.

We have been successful to a certain extent with our self sustainable model. The likes of Chelsea and city were mid table teams before the sugar daddy's arrived.



Yeah ok. So being in the champions league is mid table is it?

Woah! This is a tough one. There are positives, and there *are fundamental negatives.