Read this too, though it wont stop the demand from Usmanov I feel. The 30% is a PL ruling as I understand it, but is was deisgned for ownership structures where there was no 50% majority. Kroenke is going to have to play hard ball - refusing Usmanov a seat and refusing access to accounts. This is where is could get messy because Usmanov may use the press to fight his corner. Ugly.
We should never have got rid of Dein. It's no surprise to me that the team started regressing when Dein left. Wenger has had no-one to check his direction for the team. It may help him massively to have Dein back.
It's difficult to know what will happen really, as we're operating in the dark. There have been reports that Kronke and Gazidis are not at all against the idea of Usmanov joining the board and that it's Hill-Wood who opposes it. There's also the possibility that Kronke is indeed simply looking to make a quick buck and realising that a tough economic situation globally is not going to give him a huge return at Arsenal, he might want to sell up at an inflated price to Usmanov. Or there is the scenario that Usmanov will not be offered a seat on the board, will take a look at the accounts, realise that without an investment of huge personal wealth, that the current board are doing things pretty well and be happy to sit back for a bit longer. The pertinent question for me in all of this is where does David Dein feature? I'm not sure that Usmanov's 30% and Dein's return to the club are linked in any way. I think we would need to see Hill Wood out of the picture for that to happen.
Why would Usmanov take the last 50 odd shares to reach 30% unless he has something in mind? A look at the accounts or a seat on the Board.! If either are refused by Kroenke he can appeal to the PL, on the principle that Kroenke is therefore not a ' fit and proper director'
I thought this too. I doubt it is just an investment (especially as we're in danger of losing millions of revenue from missing the CL). he must have something in mind. He has been fighting for a while to reach the 30% figure. The other point to note is that Usmanov is now mandated to launch a take over bid and offer to buy the remaining shares. If he offers enough, who's to say Kroenke wont sell up for the very reason he is at risk of falling revenues from missing the CL.
How would Arsenal's finances cope without Champs league football? Could you continue along your current path of transfers/wages without it?
Right, Here are some maths: When Kroenke took over he paid £11,750 per share which valued Arsenal at £731m. His 66.82% holding meant at the time he held shares worth £488.45m (nice). Usmanov paid £14,500 per share to take his holding to 30%. If Kroenke accepted this offer for his shares he would walk away with £602.77m - a cool profit in less than 1 year of £114.31m (or a 23.4% return in the midst of a global slowdown). That would be very clever indeed and as I said could have been his genius plan all along. At the very least it has to be bloody tempting!
I'm not sure he does Jayram. I think the 30% rule was in place when we didn't have a majority shareholder. Now that Kronke owns 67% of the club, I don't think the 30% mandatory take over bid still remains. Unless I'm reading it wrong ?
I think the 30% forcing a take over bid is a stock market ruling, not a PL one. I did read somewhere that it is not required by the stock exchange if there is agreement between the person with 30% and the majority shareholder, but otherwise an offer has to be made at the highest price paid for shares within the last 12 months.
To most businessmen it would, however Silent Stan has a history of long term 'investment', he enters deals for the long haul not for short term gain. And to be fair his missus is heir to the Wal-mart fortune which means, as a family, they're probably not struggling to pay the mortgage. Between the pair of them they're worth billions, £100m profit would interest most I guess but I get the feeling Stan wants to 'ride' as well as the eventual profit...
My experience of very rich people is that they think in terms of ROI. Percentage return on investment. Its about being clever and "beating the index". You are right though that he tends to invest long term, but if there is any sign of a slowdown in Arsenal's growth, he might jump.
Not sure where the "seat on the board" comes from. Is it an Arsenal FC thing? Even then, I would guess that without any chance of outvoting Kronke, thre will be little or no actual benefit to that other than seeing the accounts. I doubt they are going to be controversial. Any meaningful discussion would take place in Arsenal Holdings plc and decisions passed to the club board, as a fait accompli. It does mean that Usmanov will face a fitness test by the football authorities, although that has been very lax of late, and probably isn't an issue.
