Continuing on from Rasp’s excellent but somewhat truncated post …

Is Arsenal yours or theirs? Does it belong to Kroenke and Usamov or the millions of fans?


What do you think (if anything)?

written by Big Raddy


47 Responses to Yours

  1. VP of Oz says:

    Its theirs for as long as its ours

  2. Big Raddy says:

    VP. Complex and beyond my understanding 😀

  3. Big Raddy says:

    Here’s my tuppence worth.

    It ours. Without us there is no Arsenal. No support means no value for the moneymen, think rats / sinking ship.

    Take out the fans from the Emirates and it is just some expensive concrete with a grass field in the middle.

    When the moneymen die or sell their shares Arsenal will continue because fan’s allegiance to the club is passed from generation to generation

    It has always been so.

  4. VP of Oz says:

    Hi Eddie/BR
    My kids all go trick or treating. Even the older ones. Its free friggin candy why wouldnt they. The following day we all head off to church or the cemetry to pray for our departed on All Souls Day. Is this not the case in the UK? No Souls over there?
    Is this the problem with modern players now-a-days, soulless, heartless…
    Did I mention the candy is free plus its to be found in abundance…

  5. VP of Oz says:

    BR 8:48, thats what I said at 8:41, almost verbatim

  6. chas mobile says:

    Cheers, BR.

    These days I suspect its soul belongs to television and its heart to oligarch corporatism. We get left with the bowels, I reckon. 😕

    The only bit of the Club I own is whatever emotional investment I choose to invest in it.

    Cheery soul, aren’t I?

  7. VP of Oz says:

    whoops did I come on too strong too soon?

  8. Big Raddy says:

    VP. 8.51. When you reach our age you become less enthusiastic about such things.

    Right now, you will say “No way, I am not going to become curmudgeonly with older age”

    I said the same – I was wrong 😦

  9. GunnerN5 says:

    The fans have 100% of Arsenal in their hearts and soul while the shareholders have their money and hopes in the bank.

    It’s all very simple really if the shareholders deplete the team and in turn make us mediocre that will drive away the fans then their shares will drop in value.

    On the other hand if they put more of their money into improving the team then results may improve which will make the fans happy and their shares will grow.

    If that sound like a bunch of nonsense then I will say that Terry made me say it 🙂 🙂 🙂

  10. GoonerB says:

    Cheers Raddy. I think the club lost some of its soul once it no longer had a primary British based ownership, but to be fair that is the case with many other clubs as well, and I guess Mike Ashley is an example that a British owner isn’t necessarily better.

    I do however have a bad gut feeling about Kroenke, and on reflection I think we likely made the wrong decision (from a results and footballing achievement aspect) in who was made the majority shareholder. Just my personal feelings obviously, but I feel that from a footballing achievement point of view we would likely have been better with the other fellow.

    From a sentimental point of view it would be nice to think the club is still ours but I don’t think that is quite the case and that we don’t have the power as fans we believe. I think Kroenke knows this and really doesn’t give a jot what the average dedicated supporter feels so I do feel the fans have, somewhat, lost the club.

  11. GoonerB says:

    GN5, or there is the middle ground where just enough is done to keep us from dropping away too much but never enough to be a top team again. That is where I feel we are at.

    As a non expert on such matters I have always had a feeling that the Russian and American mentality is different in big sports ownership. It comes across to me that the American view is of building the asset above all else and everything else is secondary as long as things don’t get too bad on the playing front. The Russian mentality seems to be more one of actually wanting to be the best with the outright return on the investment as a secondary consideration. I may be wrong.

  12. GunnerN5 says:

    Hi GB,

    My experience with American business and businessmen is just what you indicate. Growing their asset is considered the most important aspect of the job and managements income is typically associated with asset growth. They look at all ways to improve ROCE and will only make capital expenditures if it can be proved that the cost will be exceeded by the return on their investment.

    I know little about the motives of Russian business except that they will go to any length to gain an advantage whether it’s legal or illegal.

  13. Zee says:

    GonnerB a Good Boy,

    You are not alone in thinking Kroenke may not have been the best owner the club could have had – but who knows.

    And, altho none of us were in a position to decide who the owner should be, Lady Bracewell Smith did have that choice — and sold out.
    Four years ago she said that she should never have sold her shares to Kroenke and deeply regretted doing so — well thanks a bunch L-B-Smith, but the thought of getting £70m from the sale of those shares must have clouded your judgement.

    As to the ownership of the club — legally there are two major shareholders and a bunch of fans with 3% – possession is nine-tenths of the law – or 100% – depending on your own view of Arsenal.

    As for the rest of the fans, excluding those who legally own 3% of the shares, mentioned above — we own nothing tangible. (that is assets etc)

    But the real question; you see, should be;
    “Does the club own us, the fans?”

    Whoever says ‘No’ is not really a fan — for the rest of us, it is a rhetorical question, as we all know we are supporters for life – in it hook, line and sinker. So the answer must be YES

    Game over!! 😀

  14. chas says:

    I’m not sure we’ve actually lost anything at all.

    It’s the same as the “We want our Arsenal back” brigade.
    Which Arsenal do you want back exactly?

    The Plumstead Manor workers’ co-operative.

    The Arsenal of Fulham owner Sir Henry Norris.

    The Old Etonian Arsenal of the Hill-Woods and Bracewell-Smiths.

    The wideboy Arsenal of rich entrepreneurs Dein (sugar) and Fiszman (diamonds).

    Or the current American-Russian billionaire monstrosity.

    The closest we’ve ever been to owning the club was in the 19th century when it was first set up as a mutual society.
    So, we haven’t lost anything because we never had anything in the first place.

  15. chas says:

  16. LB says:

    A symbiotic relationship in which neither side particularly likes the other.

  17. Rasp says:

    Great post Raddy, although a tad too wordy for my liking 🙂

    Maybe we should consider owners as we do farmers. They may think they own the land, but after they’re gone, the land is still there.

    A less pragmatic owner than Kroenke may have given a more exciting ride, but possibly crashed and burned.

    Since football is all about the battle on the pitch, I would have preferred a more mercurial owner. Even if we ended up getting demoted to division 2 … think what fun it would be clawing our way back up to the top.

    A comfortable mediocrity is not particularly inspiring. We’re a lot better than that … but that’s the way it feels occasionally.

  18. Eddie says:

    @11:58 is very good indeed.

    I think Dein and Fiszman was a good combo. We were going somewhere hand in hand with them. They both loved the club and had their best interest at heart.

    Kroenke definitely hasn’t and Usmanov I am not sure about.

    Ours? ha ha ha ha ha, you is joking

  19. GunnerN5 says:

    I believe that the fans own 1005 of the the club emotionally – while the shareholders temporarily own the physical club.

  20. GunnerN5 says:

    1005 = 100%

  21. Eddie says:

    VP and Raddy – I am old now, but I have always felt the same about the trick or treat filthy custom. What parent in the right mind would allow the children knocking on doors, begging for sweets or money, and threatening to do something horrible if none are given. Mind boggles. I have never known a more disgusting teaching children by example of what should not be done. As I grow older I hate it more and more, and any child knocking on my door will leave running. I hope that will stop them doing it. I said it.

  22. Eddie says:

    GN5 – but you would not have said that about Dein and Fiszman, would you?

  23. GunnerN5 says:

    That’s true Eddie – but Dein sold his shares after saying he wouldn’t – It was classic case of the good, the bad and the ugly when he sold his shares to Red & White Holdings, an investment vehicle of Russian metal billionaire Alisher Usmanov.

    Although none of us will ever know for sure it seems that Sir Henry Norris was an emotional owner.

  24. Big Raddy says:

    I seem to recall the Dein sold his shares for about €70m. Nice work.

    There can be little doubt that DD was and is an Arsenal man as was Danny Fizman.

    Things started to change when Lady Nina got hold of her shares as she had no interest in football whatsoever. That and the demise of the Hill-Woods.

  25. chas mobile says:

    Dein was also instrumental in introducing Kroenke to Arsenal.

    Quite a lot to answer for, in retrospect.

  26. Eddie says:

    what do you mean introduced DD to Kroenke? Stan, meet the Arsenal?

    I’d say Kroenke approached Dein, not the other way round. And if anything Dein probably hoped that Stan could take us to another level.

  27. chas says:

    I prefer to believe students of Arsenal’s history.

  28. Eddie says:

    and who are Andy Kelly and Mark Andrews?? Why do you believe them??

    Dein is no fool, agreed? Would he not do a diligence check on Kroenke first to see how Stan runs other sporting enterprises? Of course he would and that would put a stop to any hopes of SK financing the club.

  29. Big Raddy says:

    Wasn’t it Dein who brought Mr Wenger to AFC?

    Much to be thankful for.

  30. Big Raddy says:

    Ooops. Sorry chas. Hadn’t refreshed which resulted in a touch of cyber-bullying 😦

  31. LB says:

    11.58 really is good.

  32. Big Raddy says:

    Spurs game very good. Lloris superb as always. He is a fine GK.

    spurs goal a clear offside.

  33. VP of Oz says:

    Eddie, challenge accepted.
    Next time I’m in the UK with my kids, the itinerary will be –
    Fly in
    Watch an Arsenal Game
    Trick or Treating at Eddies
    Shopping again
    Watch another Arsenal Game
    Fly out

  34. Eddie says:

    OMG, I have just seen spurs result, dear lord

    What if they go and win the CL??!! I would die I think

  35. chas mobile says:

  36. LB says:

    Guess it is going to have to be down to us to take spuds down a peg or two

  37. LB says:

    Zidane has as good as lost his job.

  38. Big Raddy says:

    Morning All,

    OK chas. I get the hint. There will be a new post as soon as I write it. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: