Why would Uncle Stan sell off a majority stake in a self sustaining club that has never asked him for a cent?
If anything, he had been drawing an annual "consultancy fee" before the embarrassing news came out. He probably still does, as far as I can tell.
We'd have to hold one of his kids for ransom for him to even consider this.
The fans are only ones who can get him out.
Why would Uncle Stan sell off a majority stake in a self sustaining club that has never asked him for a cent?
If anything, he had been drawing an annual "consultancy fee" before the embarrassing news came out. He probably still does, as far as I can tell.
We'd have to hold one of his kids for ransom for him to even consider this.
---
The consultency fee he has been taking is nothing really when you compare how much he could earn by selling the club. The club's value isnt going to go any higher. He would be mad not to accept the offer Usmanov seems to be offering way more than what the shares are worth.
That 3m consultancy fee comes out to 250k a month. Consultancy for what exactly..?
comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 8 minutes ago
Why would Uncle Stan sell off a majority stake in a self sustaining club that has never asked him for a cent?
If anything, he had been drawing an annual "consultancy fee" before the embarrassing news came out. He probably still does, as far as I can tell.
We'd have to hold one of his kids for ransom for him to even consider this.
---
The consultency fee he has been taking is nothing really when you compare how much he could earn by selling the club. The club's value isnt going to go any higher. He would be mad not to accept the offer Usmanov seems to be offering way more than what the shares are worth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal FC is the highest profile club in KSE's stable. A club whose majority stake they spent the better part of a decade acquiring.
It gives them the profile they need, to be considered a big fish in the world of sports management.
Kroenke would probably go into debt first, before selling his stake.
I jsut dont get why people think Stan doesnt take money out of the club. Arsenal under his ownership had the law changed so Usmanov as a shareholder of over 30% did not have a right to see the full accounts. Why do you think that was? Do you really think there is nothing going on that they dont want people to know about? If there is nothing to hide you dont go to such dramatic steps to hide it.
Hes in it for the money and £2bn that the OP said would go a long way towards his new stadium he wants to build. How many years would it take Stan to make that much if he doesnt sell? Got to worth it.
Arsenal FC is the highest profile club in KSE's stable. A club whose majority stake they spent the better part of a decade acquiring.
It gives them the profile they need, to be considered a big fish in the world of sports management.
Kroenke would probably go into debt first, before selling his stake.
---
We will see but he must be thinking about his exit strategy he wouldnt be a very good businessman if he had thought about the best way to maximize his profit margins and that is to sell the club.
Kroenke only bought the club so he can sell if for much more in the future, and we're a self sustaining club so he doesn't have to put a penny in. He paid around 600m so would more than triple his money if he sold for 2b.
comment by Darth Stan Kronke the Sith Lord turned Darthen Wenger to the dark side (U16927)
posted 11 minutes ago
I jsut dont get why people think Stan doesnt take money out of the club. Arsenal under his ownership had the law changed so Usmanov as a shareholder of over 30% did not have a right to see the full accounts. Why do you think that was? Do you really think there is nothing going on that they dont want people to know about? If there is nothing to hide you dont go to such dramatic steps to hide it.
Hes in it for the money and £2bn that the OP said would go a long way towards his new stadium he wants to build. How many years would it take Stan to make that much if he doesnt sell? Got to worth it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He takes around 3m for 'consultancy fees'. Not sure what consultancy he gives but in the grand scheme of things 3m isn't much.
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 18 minutes ago
That 3m consultancy fee comes out to 250k a month. Consultancy for what exactly..?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Arsenal Supporters Trust first raised the matter about 3 years ago . Someone asked for clarification as this amount was very similar to a rise in revenues of about £3 million as a result of a ticket price hike.
The matter was raised again and again over the next 2 years despite the club's attempts at weaseling out of a solid answer.
Things finally came to a head about a year ago, but the club then suddenly pivoted and claimed that KSE had "magnanimously" waived the then £6 million fee.
2b is a massive offer that has to be accepted. We need to become challengers again.
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
Kroenke only bought the club so he can sell if for much more in the future, and we're a self sustaining club so he doesn't have to put a penny in. He paid around 600m so would more than triple his money if he sold for 2b.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's never really been about the money per se.
Unlike the Alan Sugars of this world, Kroenke's main business is "Entertainment and Sports". He's not going to sell the club and put the money into stocks or put up another factory complex in China.
Arsenal acts as his flagship "franchise" and increases KSE's reputation across the globe.
The fact that we're a well run self-sustaining business means that the value of his shares will keep going up, and he doesn't even have to reach into his pockets every summer when Wenger brings out his shopping list.
Win win.
Hope he gets the fack out
I don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
---
Problem is its not a level playing field. If FFP had been implemented properly then we would have fair chance. With it being easy to get around the self sufficient model doesnt work in an ultra competitive competition.
If you cant beat them join them.
comment by jollygood Ali Nadim (U10469)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
I don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roman started us off, but if he walked out the door tomorrow we'd still be rich
comment by Randomer - Don Antonio's Premier League Champions (U5245)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by jollygood Ali Nadim (U10469)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
I don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roman started us off, but if he walked out the door tomorrow we'd still be rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah that's basically my point. Abramovich changed your trajectory as a club completely whereas if we were taken over by a billionaire Russian it wouldn't change our trajectory that much as we're already a rich club as a result of success on the pitch.
It's true that if he left now you wouldn't be affected that much but your initial success of the last 10 years is a bit hollow as it never would've happened without Abramovich. So your foundation for success has been built from external money whereas ours has been from success on the pitch.
Again. We really don't need Usmanov or any other billionaire. The club makes more than enough money by itself to compete.
What we need is better leadership, including (obviously not limited to) the owner and board. People who actually understand football - we don't have this.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Time to cash out Kroenke
Page 1 of 1
posted on 20/5/17
Why would Uncle Stan sell off a majority stake in a self sustaining club that has never asked him for a cent?
If anything, he had been drawing an annual "consultancy fee" before the embarrassing news came out. He probably still does, as far as I can tell.
We'd have to hold one of his kids for ransom for him to even consider this.
posted on 20/5/17
The fans are only ones who can get him out.
posted on 20/5/17
Why would Uncle Stan sell off a majority stake in a self sustaining club that has never asked him for a cent?
If anything, he had been drawing an annual "consultancy fee" before the embarrassing news came out. He probably still does, as far as I can tell.
We'd have to hold one of his kids for ransom for him to even consider this.
---
The consultency fee he has been taking is nothing really when you compare how much he could earn by selling the club. The club's value isnt going to go any higher. He would be mad not to accept the offer Usmanov seems to be offering way more than what the shares are worth.
posted on 20/5/17
That 3m consultancy fee comes out to 250k a month. Consultancy for what exactly..?
posted on 20/5/17
comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 8 minutes ago
Why would Uncle Stan sell off a majority stake in a self sustaining club that has never asked him for a cent?
If anything, he had been drawing an annual "consultancy fee" before the embarrassing news came out. He probably still does, as far as I can tell.
We'd have to hold one of his kids for ransom for him to even consider this.
---
The consultency fee he has been taking is nothing really when you compare how much he could earn by selling the club. The club's value isnt going to go any higher. He would be mad not to accept the offer Usmanov seems to be offering way more than what the shares are worth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal FC is the highest profile club in KSE's stable. A club whose majority stake they spent the better part of a decade acquiring.
It gives them the profile they need, to be considered a big fish in the world of sports management.
Kroenke would probably go into debt first, before selling his stake.
posted on 20/5/17
I jsut dont get why people think Stan doesnt take money out of the club. Arsenal under his ownership had the law changed so Usmanov as a shareholder of over 30% did not have a right to see the full accounts. Why do you think that was? Do you really think there is nothing going on that they dont want people to know about? If there is nothing to hide you dont go to such dramatic steps to hide it.
Hes in it for the money and £2bn that the OP said would go a long way towards his new stadium he wants to build. How many years would it take Stan to make that much if he doesnt sell? Got to worth it.
posted on 20/5/17
Arsenal FC is the highest profile club in KSE's stable. A club whose majority stake they spent the better part of a decade acquiring.
It gives them the profile they need, to be considered a big fish in the world of sports management.
Kroenke would probably go into debt first, before selling his stake.
---
We will see but he must be thinking about his exit strategy he wouldnt be a very good businessman if he had thought about the best way to maximize his profit margins and that is to sell the club.
posted on 20/5/17
Kroenke only bought the club so he can sell if for much more in the future, and we're a self sustaining club so he doesn't have to put a penny in. He paid around 600m so would more than triple his money if he sold for 2b.
posted on 20/5/17
comment by Darth Stan Kronke the Sith Lord turned Darthen Wenger to the dark side (U16927)
posted 11 minutes ago
I jsut dont get why people think Stan doesnt take money out of the club. Arsenal under his ownership had the law changed so Usmanov as a shareholder of over 30% did not have a right to see the full accounts. Why do you think that was? Do you really think there is nothing going on that they dont want people to know about? If there is nothing to hide you dont go to such dramatic steps to hide it.
Hes in it for the money and £2bn that the OP said would go a long way towards his new stadium he wants to build. How many years would it take Stan to make that much if he doesnt sell? Got to worth it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He takes around 3m for 'consultancy fees'. Not sure what consultancy he gives but in the grand scheme of things 3m isn't much.
posted on 20/5/17
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 18 minutes ago
That 3m consultancy fee comes out to 250k a month. Consultancy for what exactly..?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Arsenal Supporters Trust first raised the matter about 3 years ago . Someone asked for clarification as this amount was very similar to a rise in revenues of about £3 million as a result of a ticket price hike.
The matter was raised again and again over the next 2 years despite the club's attempts at weaseling out of a solid answer.
Things finally came to a head about a year ago, but the club then suddenly pivoted and claimed that KSE had "magnanimously" waived the then £6 million fee.
posted on 20/5/17
2b is a massive offer that has to be accepted. We need to become challengers again.
posted on 20/5/17
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 16 minutes ago
Kroenke only bought the club so he can sell if for much more in the future, and we're a self sustaining club so he doesn't have to put a penny in. He paid around 600m so would more than triple his money if he sold for 2b.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's never really been about the money per se.
Unlike the Alan Sugars of this world, Kroenke's main business is "Entertainment and Sports". He's not going to sell the club and put the money into stocks or put up another factory complex in China.
Arsenal acts as his flagship "franchise" and increases KSE's reputation across the globe.
The fact that we're a well run self-sustaining business means that the value of his shares will keep going up, and he doesn't even have to reach into his pockets every summer when Wenger brings out his shopping list.
Win win.
posted on 20/5/17
Hope he gets the fack out
posted on 20/5/17
I don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
posted on 20/5/17
don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
---
Problem is its not a level playing field. If FFP had been implemented properly then we would have fair chance. With it being easy to get around the self sufficient model doesnt work in an ultra competitive competition.
If you cant beat them join them.
posted on 20/5/17
comment by jollygood Ali Nadim (U10469)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
I don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roman started us off, but if he walked out the door tomorrow we'd still be rich
posted on 20/5/17
comment by Randomer - Don Antonio's Premier League Champions (U5245)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by jollygood Ali Nadim (U10469)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
I don't like the idea of our success originating from a Russian billionaire who will just throw money everywhere. That would put us on Chelsea's level. Any success would feel a little bit fake. It's slightly different to Chelsea's case though as we've become rich through success whereas with Chelsea and Man City it was an overnight change to being rich. I still don't like the idea though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roman started us off, but if he walked out the door tomorrow we'd still be rich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah that's basically my point. Abramovich changed your trajectory as a club completely whereas if we were taken over by a billionaire Russian it wouldn't change our trajectory that much as we're already a rich club as a result of success on the pitch.
It's true that if he left now you wouldn't be affected that much but your initial success of the last 10 years is a bit hollow as it never would've happened without Abramovich. So your foundation for success has been built from external money whereas ours has been from success on the pitch.
posted on 21/5/17
Again. We really don't need Usmanov or any other billionaire. The club makes more than enough money by itself to compete.
What we need is better leadership, including (obviously not limited to) the owner and board. People who actually understand football - we don't have this.
Page 1 of 1