Red & White’s Open Letter, and the subsequent chatter around the internet is the reason I decided to try and write something. Trouble is, I am angry, and I don’t know if I’ll be coherent enough. Why am I angry? Because I don’t like my club being harmed. Now, some would argue that the club being harmed is exactly what makes Usmanov angry, or ‘concerned’. And that’s why he’s decided to write something like what he did. I disagree. But let’s move on from this for a while. I’ll keep referring to parts of the letter though.

The more fundamental question is..Why do people think there is something wrong at Arsenal? Usmanov refers to dressing up a bad game, and I guess the same applies here. No matter what people say, the reason for there being a perception of something being wrong, is only that we haven’t won a trophy for a while. And that is exactly what Usmanov is seeking to capitalise on.

What is a trophy? It’s something you win. Even Usmanov says “because it is the trophies which are the crowning achievement for everybody at the club.” What is the keyword in there for most people? For me, it’s ACHIEVEMENT. A trophy is not the end to be reached at all costs. It is something you earn. You earn it by playing well. You earn it by being better than others wanting to win it too. Sometimes, despite playing well enough you miss out on it due to factors outside your control that can be simplistically labelled as luck. Where is the achievement in assembling a team of the highest paid players? What is the meaning of the trophy if you are simply getting your hands on it? I could buy a trophy from some guy who won the track and field at the national athletic meet. Hell I could pump myself full of drugs, nobble him, and even race him for it and beat him. (See, I worked for it) I would then display it in my cabinet. Maybe show it off to some people who visit, who would be suitably impressed. But what do I get from it? Nothing. Nothing important anyway.

But let’s say you do. Some of you feel that the trophy IS the ultimate achievement regardless of how you come by it. What would be the collateral you would be willing to give in exchange for your trophies? What would you sacrifice for it? After all, no such thing as a free lunch. So if you’re not paying the bill for your lunch, someone else is. Who is footing that bill, and why? What do you risk owing that person in exchange for having your ephemeral desire satiated? And what do you have left after the desire is fulfilled?

Having one person owning the club is inherently risky. For every Abramovich there are tens of Shinawatras, Chainrais, Ridsdales, Whytes, Yeungs, Venkys, Tans, Romanovs (starting to get the picture yet?) And if you don’t know who they are, it’s because the media doesn’t quite give the same amount of coverage to the important problems in football, as it does to transfers and the rest of the drama. Of course, nothing like this could happen to Arsenal. Arsenal could never go bankrupt. Even if we do, there will always be someone richer and more ‘ambitious’ to rescue us and bring us more trophies. Right? You come back to the point about why someone will foot your bill. Let’s get one thing straight. Rich people do not give away money. That isn’t how they got rich in the first place. If they seem to give away money, it’s because they aim to gain something out of it. It’ll always be more money, whether directly or indirectly. It could be an advertisement, it could be as an investment, it could be to gain legitimacy. Anything. But it is never charity. Never. Eventually, they will no longer need this toy that they have. It will happen. It may not be in 1 year, or 10, or 50. But it will happen.

Now some people seem to have no problem with players switching clubs for more money. Neither do I. They do it in contravention of rules though, and that’s something we shouldn’t forget, or brush over. But ok, we’d all switch our jobs for more money. But would we switch our loyalties? Let’s say someone offered you a large sum of money to start supporting Chelsea with them (because they are all alone and they want to feel as involved with their community as we are) Would you do it? Turn your back on Arsenal? Chelsea win trophies, remember? I would think not. So it seems people have some qualms about switching loyalties for money or trophies. Yet, what people are advocating with bringing Usmanov in, is also switching loyalties.

What are we loyal to? Just the name ‘Arsenal’? Well, we were also variously named Dial Square, Woolwich Arsenal, Royal Arsenal etc. right? Didn’t our fans maintain their loyalty? Don’t we accept those names as part of our history?

What are we loyal to? The location of the club? Well, yes. But the reason for that isn’t just location itself. It’s what it represents (and I’m an overseas fan) to the people, to its traditions.

I follow Arsenal because of our ethos. Our tradition. our values. Our class. Our style of play. Our history of success.

Now. Some of those things will not last forever, and I’ll still be around supporting Arsenal. For instance, our style of play. I’ll still follow Arsenal if we play like a bunch of club footed, catenaccio loving bunch of amateurs. And of course, if we are playing like that, there will be no trophies.

But some things, are THE identity of Arsenal. Values, and traditions. CLASS.

For one moment, forget trophies, forget FFP, and talk of we can’t compete (we do compete most years) and think about it. It’s just good sense to not spend more than you have. Most of the world is finding out right now that living in and off credit is something which comes back to bite you. Usmanov’s notion of a debt free club, with a large war chest is all well and good. But isn’t that exactly what the current board are looking to achieve?

In any case, having a sugar daddy model doesn’t guarantee success. Even in today’s world. What happens when EVERYONE goes down that route. You can pump in 2billion, someone else will pump in 5, someone else 10. What guarantee do you have that any amount of money will be enough? Are there enough billionaires interested to go around? And that’s nothing to say of what it means for the state of true competition in football. Even the US, which is the most capitalist country in the world, organises its sports in a very socialistic manner with wage caps, draft system, and restrictive transfer rules, because those rules promote a more competitive environment. ManCity might be Arsenal’s rival, but if they end up destroying all competition, they end up destroying themselves. Sports are not a normal competitive business environment in that sense. There are no monopolies in sport. There is no excitement in viewing a foregone conclusion. Arsenal do things in a way which are moral, which are important, and importantly, which does have a chance of success. The chance is lower, and it is affected by being targeted at this point. But the chance is still there. They only target us, because they fear us.

And I include Usmanov in that. Usmanov wants to own the club, right? If Arsenal succeed, he doesn’t get to own Arsenal. As such, his ‘concerns’ are very much the opposite of Arsenal’s. His interests are contrary to the fans. Usmanov is selling a dream. A dream Ridsdale sold his Leeds fans, and then said that for a while, we lived it at least. To be fair, the board is selling a dream too. The worst that can happen in following that dream is that we won’t win trophies. The worst that can happen with chasing Usmanov’s dream is…well.. a LOT worse. Trophies would be the last of our worries then. Ask Portsmouth fans. Usmanov came in through paying Dein 75m for his shares. and promptly proceeded to go on a bullying spree against all the blogs who were naturally enough curious about his past. His shady past shouldn’t disqualify him, but it should make us wary of him. Usmanov is also the only one making high and mighty promises, which he knows he’ll have no need to prove until he can give us all a massive shrug with massive shoulders and say..Tough.. I lied. He’s the only one who makes opportunistic statements destabilising the club, just to try and force his way in. He’s using the fans’ concerns, presenting them as his own, and trying to use us to get his way. Kroenke was on the outside looking in too. He never made any statements harming Arsenal. Of course, Kroenke is not an angel. He is just someone who’s track record and behaviour suggests he is more trustworthy, or at least, less risky.

I would MUCH prefer not having either of these people involved with Arsenal. But only Kroenke has sports teams (and no, they are not all ‘unsuccessful’. Saying that is displaying a vast ignorance about how US sports are structured) He has NEVER sold any share in any sports team he has owned. He was initially resisted by the board, but brought in once Usmanov appeared on the scene. (which suggests they aren’t simply motivated to sell out, nor did they accept Usmanov’s higher offer)  Kronke uses his sports teams as a business. Arsenal IS a business. What does he bring to the business? He brings with him a wealth of marketing experience using sports teams. Liverpool’s owners managed to get them a bumper shirt deal through their own channels of influence. Kroenke offers us much the same. He can increase our brand value, and that in itself isn’t as simplistic as saying, if you win, your brand value goes up. Kroenke has something to offer us. His endgame is still unknown, but his record of not selling any sports team gives me confidence he’s not here to make just a quick buck.

So basically, I think this whole worrying over trophies is distracting us from the main issue. The current board need to change some aspects of their running of the club, in an ever changing situation, but what they say, and even the transfer dealings over the last 2 summers suggest they are aware of that. The desire for change, should not mean desire for complete change. We will not know whether R & W will be any better, until it’s too late to do anything about it. So far, everything Usmanov has done, has led me to grow more and more in favour of keeping him out. Much as I’d prefer Kroenke also gone, at the moment, if he’s all that’s stopping Usmanov from coming in, I’m thankful for his presence.

To end, I will make a statement that seems to go contrary to all I’ve written above. I think it is possible to maintain class, even under a billionaire model. No really, It is. A financier doesn’t HAVE to change the club’s ethos. He doesn’t have to make the club all about money. He can help the club overcome some shortcomings. But in that case, he doesn’t guarantee much more success at trophies. Once you start paying players more and more money, class invariably goes out the window. In any case, Usmanov has a distinct lack of class, and he’s shown a few times that he’s willing to harm Arsenal to serve his own interests. Hence my feelings above.

Written by Shard

I don’t know where to begin. I was so positive about this summer and the coming season. I wrote a post on here – “Van Persie, Van Mystery”- in which I admitted the fears, but espoused the hopes of the fateful meeting between Arsène, Gazidis, and van Persie..I now notice how I naturally refer to each.. Van Persie used to be Robin…not anymore.. — Gazidis.. will probably never be Ivan, but who knows (I always remind you all that I’m an open minded Gunner). Of course Arsène, that will never change, he will always be our Arsène for me, unless they find some bodies buried in his basement, and even then I’d probably forgive him. He’s just so damn magnetic !

Rather than run through all the recent confusion and possible scenarios for this summer (rampant in the press and blogosphere), I will set some reasonable goals, with just a few hypotheticals, and some things that would satisfy me as a fan.

Before the bad van Persie news this week.. I was hoping for a couple more signings after Giroud and Podolski. –  either a good quality DM or CAM. I say either, because, it would be unrealistic to expect both, and we have a couple of versatile high quality midfielders in Wilshire and Arteta who can adjust to compliment either, I believe, and I trust Arsène’s vision on where to use them, especially JW.

I do like the idea of a solid PL back up goalkeeper, and I don’t see anything in the rumours that says Arsene wants someone to replace Szczesny,( maybe a decent challenge at best ) or that we would spend a lot there.

After this, I would have considered anything more coming in as a big bonus.

I think we will move a few sellable players out. Maybe Bendtner,Chamakh, Vela, and Arshavin ( he really screwed up the Zenit plan by opening his mouth at the Euros)  We have to be honest… not everyone can be moved at their current wages.  But these few have  value. Yes, some teams like Chamakh.

Where things get a little sticky, is, any possible domino effect with Walcott and Song. I will not go into all the possible permutations of what can happen there– so i will simplify it. —- If somehow things get really ugly, I don’t want Arsenal to find out when it’s too late to do anything about it. Neither Theo or Alex would be someone to hold onto if they refuse to extend. So they need to be signed, or moved, and replaced. (maybe signed, then at a later date, sold? )Seriously. If we have another last minute debacle, we should be ashamed, and someone would have to pay, in my estimation.

On Usmanov… I know it’s hard to take the shareholder infighting, especially after RvP’s statement and it was a bit of opportunism. But I try to put myself in the rich guys shoes : I’m trying to take control of this club, probably to try and make it better. I’m willing to spend, but the current board is blocking me at every turn. I’m watching this loser Kroenke, who doesn’t care about the team personally, I’m sure. He isn’t doing anything to help, personally, yet he blocks me from trying to change things. You know he probably isn’t a football fan, except NFL. Why can’t I speak out. Everyone else can blog, or give their opinion as much as they want.

Consider this, maybe he was justifiably outraged whenever he found out, like some fans we know.

Back to me.  I don’t want a sugar daddy owner, I’m proud of how we try to do business, but there is a reasonable middle ground, with a little bit of owner investment, especially until we renew our bigger commercial deals. A moderate investment in the squad (keeping FFP in mind), and greater success, would make those new deals more lucrative, surely. It may never be a perfect ownership situation, but there is certainly a lot of room for improvement. For all we know, Wenger may be secretly hoping Usmanov gets in.

And lastly, about van Persie. I reserve the right to change my mind about this, but this is where I stand right now: I don’t want us to accept a pathetic offer. I don’t want any team to take advantage of the situation as it is, or for RvP to force his way. Either pay for the player of the year, or he stays, and helps us make a run. RvP will have to play well to prove he’s worth top salary in a year. He will have to risk under performing, and injury. But he shouldn’t mind accepting less, because it’s not about the money, right? Actually, he will do fine, because without any transfer fee next year, a couple teams will still be able to pay a big salary or signing bonus.

I want us to show anyone and everyone, that we are not desperate to take any cash we can get. We would rather have one more year with a great striker, who is moulded perfectly to our system, – to make a strong title run. —OR, If we get a strong offer, take it, and go get one more good attacker for depth. Either way, we will pick a new captain.

With so much outrage among fans and press this past week, I think my view is reasonable. Less emotional today.

Written by jnyc

I have always been a staunch ‘sustainable model’ kind of guy, in keeping, you might say, with my career as a no-nonsense, think with your head and not with your heart accountant.

However, recent events have made me stop and reflect on that ‘sustainability’ stance.

The Chavs are now beginning to flex their obscene financial muscle, once again, in the transfer market to re-stock their ageing squad while Citeh continuously threaten to hoover up any footballing talent not securely nailed down after buying their first Premier League title, and even the Spuds are beginning to flex Joe Lewis’ chequebook.

Manyoo, for many years after the founding of the Premier League, plundered the top British talent, and continue to do so. They have been joined by a plethora of established clubs throughout Europe, together with the recent arrival of the latest bunch of artless financial pillagers.

Despite that, and the contiguous financial drain of building a new stadium, we have maintained our position as the second most successful Premiership team in terms of points earned, since the inception of the League, with 1,449 points, with only Manyoo above us on 1,663.

Those points, however, have not translated into a proportionate number of titles won, and this has caused a wave of unrest among many Gooners everywhere.

I have already mentioned two of the relatively new boys on the block, and bearing in mind our wish to be competitive in European football too, it might be worth having a look at a number of our wealthy competitors, including the oil nation or ‘rich boy toy’ clubs who have sprung up in recent years.

• Man City = Abu Dhabi Unt Group – bought 2008 — £1bn
• Chelsea = Abramovich – bought 2003 – £1bn
• Anzhi Makhachkala = S Kerimonov – Russia – bought 2011 — £200m
• Paris St Germain = Qatar Investment Authority – bought 2011 – £100m
• Malaga = Sheikh Abdullah (Qatar) – bought 2010 – £75m
• Real Madrid = ‘Socios’ members – Spanish government backed
• Barcelona owned by its supporters – Catalonia backed
• Man Utd = Malcolm Glazer and family, billionaires {landed debt for purchase of the club on its own balance sheet}.
• Spurs – Privately owned by Joe Lewis – billionaire – shows financial muscle in discrete way.
• Juventus and AC Milan from Italy
• Bayern from Germany

The list is not exhaustive!

There are, in addition, any number of other clubs who have powerful (secondary) financial backing, which will become evident in the near future, such as Liverpool, Villa and Newcastle, while other ‘poor’ clubs are begging to be taken over and elevated into the ‘financial mainstream’, such as Everton and a number of well known Spanish and French clubs.

Arsenal’s options within this mounting tide of footballing opulence, is to stay as we currently are, sensible, well run, self sustaining, but inevitably doomed to a cycle of a diminishing world fan base and a resultant decrease in commercial financial worth, caused by the lack of silverware; or to grasp the bullet, and accept the cornucopia of unbelievable wealth which is on offer from the likes of Usmanov, or some other oily benefactor, which may well bring many a trophy success, but might also be a poisoned chalice if we embrace mammon.

Look, I have no easy answers.

Although I love sport in general, there is no other club I love with the unreasoning passion that I have for Arsenal, so what is the best for my club is my only driver in this discussion.
As a point in question, I can tell you that second and third in my ‘love’ list are “The New York Yankees” and “The New York Giants” respectively. I watch them when I can, and always religiously look for their scores. I am infused with joy when they win and plunged into gloom when they lose.

What I don’t care about, and never give a tuppenny fig for, is who currently owns their franchises, or how much they bought them for, or where the money comes from to successfully the run the clubs.
These owner guys live in a world of wealth I can only dream about, and they would laugh their heads off if they thought I worried, for even a nano-second about their financial sustainability.

These guys are in it to win games and trophies and thereby to increase their commercial returns and make profits, while enjoying the ego trip.

Therein lays the rub.

You see, there is a very well known, extremely wealthy, American entrepreneur called Stan Kroenke, who owns a number of franchises in the US. And do you know what? I don’t care about his commercial franchises, or how profitable they are, anymore than I do those of the owners of the Yankees or the Giants. And frankly, I could care less for Mr Usmanov if it came to that.

The trouble is, here in the UK, it seems, I actually must worry myself, as part of the “committed fan” package, as to whether Stan’s financial model is running sustainably or not, (which basically means he does not run the club at a loss, while his shares continue to accrue in value) whilst sublimating my own quite justifiable desires for Premier League and European Champions League success and glory.

What is going on here?

I supported Arsenal, originally, as a boy, because of family influences, and then grew to love the chutzpah of the club, its football playing style and the sheer joyous exhilaration and exaltation of my fabulous team winning games and collecting trophies!!

I am quite sure I did not sign up to worry about the financial worth of the club’s wealthy shareholders!

Do you know what — writing this article has been catharctic, and I am beginning to come to my senses and realize that Arsenal are never going to go bust — ever — and my real and only sustainable love is for Arsenal my club, and the Arsenal team’s success — and as for Stan and his sustainable entrepreneurial investment – not so much!!

I know there is an understandable feeling among many loyal, long term supporters to continue with the “Arsenal” way of doing things, and they are entitled to think that way, and to eschew the introduction of ‘obscene’ wealth into the club. However, so too are the other equally loyal Arsenal fans who see the “Arsenal” way of doing things as an ephemeral and esoteric concept, and simply want to see their club competing and winning on a level financial playing field.

Now, stripped down to its basics, we are faced with answering the following question;

Do you want Arsenal to compete successfully with the ever expanding list of ‘rich’ clubs on a level playing field, or do you want to subscribe to a beautiful accounting concept that mainly benefits the incumbent shareholders and perhaps never win anything?

For me the jury is still out – but I am wavering, whereas in the past I was totally in the pro sustainable model camp.

What we, as fans think, is moot in truth, especially if the financial takeovers of more clubs carry on at the current rate, I think the decision will be taken by Stan to take his substantial profit and run — just like all the previous shareholders have done!

Written by Red Arse

A provocative headline designed to grab your attention? Yes, guilty but I believe there is a quite a lot of truth in it.

The change of direction that I am talking about is reflected in the kind of player that Podolski and Giroud are. These footballers are big powerful no nonsense types, they signal a change in style, perhaps even a return to the days when Arsenal fielded big strong powerful teams which included the likes of Vieira, Petit, Adams, Bould and Campbell; when those players took to the field the opposition were scared. What Podolski and Giroud are definitely not is a continuation of Arshavin, Nasri and Fàbregas; for example, the super skilful diminutive types which to me is vital clue that indicates the change in direction that I refer to above.

If you think you are upset about not winning a trophy in the last seven years I am prepared to bet it is only a fraction of the pain that Wenger feels about that statistic.

Personally I think we were unlucky, the Fàbregas era was worthy of a title or two but equally I can see the argument that the league title does not lie and the fact remains that that experiment did not work and a new way must be found. The reason I can see this side of the argument is that I do not believe that even the most accomplished proponents of the super quick passing game, no other than Barcelona would win the EPL year in and year out. The Catalans never seem to come up against teams in La Liga prepared to play with ten men behind the ball. I remember reading an interview with Cesc saying that that approach would not be tolerated by any team in Spain regardless of the relegation implications – Barcelona meet Sam Allardyce and there are plenty more, as we all know, of his ilk.

Passenal has not worked trophy wise, although, entertainment wise it has been a dream for a season ticket holder like myself but I accept it might be time for a bit of silverware to take up some space in the still bare Emirates trophy cabinet.

I am going to do something now that I have criticised many in the past for doing and that is sing the praises of manu so if you want to get your own back go ahead. The reason in my mind as to why manu kept on winning as much as they did with what seemed like an average team at times was because they had a good balance between power and skill. That’s enough praise, they are now on a down hill trajectory. The reasons are fairly obvious; they have an aging team and the manager does not know which way to turn. They are, in short, where we were a few years ago. There are a couple a key clues that back this up. If Rooney came on the market now do you think he would go to manu or City? When was the last time we could say at this point in the transfer window that we were happier with our signings than we would have been with manu’s? Would you prefer Kagawa and Powell or Podolski and Giroud?

We are coming out of that dip because Wenger has found a way to operate amongst the two obvious financial heavy weights: Chelsea and City. Ferguson on the other hand looks like a spent force; he doesn’t know which way to turn now that he no longer has the financial muscle to buy the top players in the EPL.

Manu we have you in our sights.

Next season’s Arsenal line up is going to be different: for the first time, in a long time we will be starting a new EPL season with power and strength as our main weapons.

————-Szczesny

Sagna, BFG, Koscielny, Vermaelen.

——-Song, Diaby, Arteta.

——The Ox, Giroud, Podolski.

This is not the team I expect to line up for the first game of the season but it could be.

And if it is, the message to any opposition will be – Be afraid, be very afraid.

Written by LB