Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
n/a

David Dein real talk

30 posts in this topic

i no theres few guys on here who play fm all day , then scream fuk wenger when we dont sign villa for 35m 120k a week(muhammed ali)people should vent there anger at the board they have taken the pissone of if not the highest match day pricesno spendingwhile they get rich of wengers prudence (look how much fizsman made out of us)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Arsenal board have come under fire from two senior former directors, with David Dein describing the club as being in the "Stone Age" compared to Manchester United and Lady Bracewell-Smith attacking her "callous" treatment by her former colleagues. Arsenal have not won a major trophy since Dein left the boardroom in 2007 and the former vice-chairman questioned whether the club were now strong enough to compete with the elite of European football. "The landscape is changing," said Dein. "Manchester City, Aston Villa, Everton and Tottenham are not going to stand still, to say nothing of Manchester United, Chelsea." Responding to the suggestion that Arsene Wenger would not spend big money, Dein said: "He's never had the luxury. Is it strong enough to compete with the likes of Barcelona and Milan? Compared to Manchester United, we are in the Stone Age. "Have they [the directors] ever said, 'Arsene, don't have a conscience over the cost. We've gone past that stage now. We've got to be brave and bold in the market. Just tell us, how much do you need to win the Champions League?' " Dein's remarks were published in a new book, Arsènal – The Making of a Modern Super Club, in which Lady Bracewell-Smith also gives a detailed interview about the reasons behind her controversial departure from the board last year. It is claimed that Lady Bracewell-Smith was informed that the board wanted her to leave shortly after she had sat on the top table at the club's annual meeting and been unanimously re-elected by shareholders. Lady Bracewell-Smith, whose family have a 70-year association with the club, says that she was previously kept on the board only because of her sizeable shareholding. "I had been unfairly treated since the day I entered [the boardroom]," she said. "Danny Fiszman always kept his distance and you got the feeling that if you didn't fall in line you were marginalised. "They [the board] didn't like having to take me in, but because of the dismissal of David Dein, I had 15 per cent and they had to put up with it. "Now they've got Stan Kroenke they don't need me any more. Dismissing a director is taking matters to an extreme and the timing was callous. People shouldn't behave like that to a woman." Lady Bracewell-Smith also admitted that she did not accept "the plurality of the shareholding". Peter Hill-Wood, the chairman, said that Lady Bracewell-Smith had been offered an honorary position that would have maintained her post-match privileges in the directors' box. "I fervently wish that she hadn't left in the way that she did," he said. "As a director she was not right but why not stay in a capacity that would allow her to maintain all the other status? She confused me and upset me considerably because we offered her all sorts of olive branches." Hill-Wood also acknowledged that Arsenal needed to improve their commercial operation and admitted that the Highbury Square property development was unlikely to deliver extra profits. "On the commercial side we're lacking and we've got a lot of catching up to do with Manchester United, Barcelona, Real, even Liverpool and maybe Chelsea," he said. Ivan Gazidis, the new chief executive, said: "Long-term I'm confident that the club will be strong and one of the best clubs in England and the world."
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lady Bracewell-Smith will sell her shares on.Fizsman wants Stan to be owner that's quite obvious

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill-Wood is a old knob. Been saying it for time.I'd pick Dein over Hill-Wood in a second, infact its not even a choice...While many Arsenal fans may disagree I think the clubs treatment of Usmanov is disgraceful too.When I see Hill-Wood and his getalong gang cosying up to Kroenke, I'm disgusted, but hey thats "business" I guess. Throughout the whole board room saga the only person who in my eyes seems to come out best is Dein, but in many a peoples eyes he's the villain. Its f*cked.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Throughout the whole board room saga the only person who in my eyes seems to come out best is Dein, but in many a peoples eyes he's the villain. Its f*cked.
Thats the main thing tbh... half the Arsenal fans think DD is only trouble, and he is to an extent but the was just what we needed off the pitch/in the boardroom
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dein does whats best for the club, granted he wants to do that and be rewarded, be it hero worshipping or financially... But fact remains he wants the club to be the best it can be, and as a fan thats all I want.It amazes me how Arsenal fans can be pro-Kroenke, yet anti-Dein. I just sit there and think do people forget Dein lost his job to bring Kroenke to the club, against the boards wants at the time... The same board that now paint the picture of Kroenke being the guy to eventually takeover. kmt.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hill-Wood is a old knob. Been saying it for time.I'd pick Dein over Hill-Wood in a second, infact its not even a choice...While many Arsenal fans may disagree I think the clubs treatment of Usmanov is disgraceful too.When I see Hill-Wood and his getalong gang cosying up to Kroenke, I'm disgusted, but hey thats "business" I guess. Throughout the whole board room saga the only person who in my eyes seems to come out best is Dein, but in many a peoples eyes he's the villain. Its f*cked.
hill-wood has been a c*nt from day. the board are stuffing there pockets nicelylol at how they went from stinging attacks on stan to trying to put there arm around him. beg the rest just sell up n f*ck offend of the day fans can empathise with DD cos he just wants arsenal to win things and be a superpower just like we do realised to compete we would need more financial muscle while the old cunts just wanna live forever. cunts
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dein is a little scummy jew that is all

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your a d*ckhead for the sly send still. If you cared to read my arguments its him chatting sh*t, transfer policy and his constant backing of players who are clearly not cutting it that is the main reasons behind me wanting Wenger gone. Its long to get into it again, next year when we are trophyless again you man along with the majority will still back Wenger because of his past. Hasnt won a thing in years yet seems to be best for the club. We were close to losing out to the top four last year yet STILL people were backing Wenger. Would a new manager really bring us any lower than we are now?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But your skipping the problem, the issue isn't Wenger, its the club & the board.I cant be bothered to repeat my issues with Hill-Wood, lets just say his only intention is to line his pockets and stay chairman, the guys doesnt even own 1% in shares & has never even attempted to increase his stake, he feels his surname is enough, smh... When Dein bought his shares, Hill-Wood thought he was crazy to invest money into a football club, so 15+ years later I'm sure he watches in amazement at Usmanov and Kroenke...But anyway like I've said before Wenger isn't scared to spend big, but he is scared of ruining his legacy by ruining the club financially and having the board tell him he has to sell players...You could get a new manager and he would get money to spend and he would spend it, but we only have so much, and the manager that spends even 25m, with no sales, will be expected to win the league and we are in the era of spending 100m just to challenge the top 4, so its not enough if you base it purely on spending. Look at Rioch he spent "big" on Bergkamp (7.5m) and Platt (4.75m), we finished 5th, he wanted more money the summer later and the club sacked him...This is the issue that Dein is trying to make, nothing has changed at Arsenal.Lol, a new manager could easily make us drop out of the top 4. Wenger works miracles tbh. He nearly won the league with Almunia in goal & Eboue right-wing!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your a d*ckhead for the sly send still. If you cared to read my arguments its him chatting sh*t, transfer policy and his constant backing of players who are clearly not cutting it that is the main reasons behind me wanting Wenger gone. Its long to get into it again, next year when we are trophyless again you man along with the majority will still back Wenger because of his past. Hasnt won a thing in years yet seems to be best for the club. We were close to losing out to the top four last year yet STILL people were backing Wenger. Would a new manager really bring us any lower than we are now?
so dumb im not writin an essay this yrwenger out!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL @ actually thinking Rioch had that money to spend.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not saying it is all Wenger but he has a lot to do with it as well as the board. If the board have no money and still come out saying there is money for Wenger to spend its up to Wenger to show it or come out and say that there isnt money there. If it is all the board then Wenger should be unhappy and challenging the board to show there commitment and passion for the club.How can we progress when every year we go in a circle losing a few players and gaining one if lucky two? This club isnt going to progress unless Wenger talks up. He is the manager of the club, the face, people look at his interviews to find out what the club will look like for the season, we look at him to be real with us on where the clubs going. He chats sh*t as much as the board do.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wenger has morals. Whether thats a good or bad thing, who knows, but thats why Dein worked so well for him, cos Dein has next to no morals. They was good cop, bad cop. Guys like Gazidis or Friar are Hill-Wood's men, cos he pays their wages & they know they are easily replaced. Dein was his own man (partly cos he had more shares than Hill-Wood and felt he could do what he wanted, as he did).No. Arsenal probably have about 20-25m in surplus, as thats the average yearly profit, please note with player sales. The board say what they say to keep the fans on board and from becoming pro-takeover. Wenger wont get at the board publically cos he justs not that guy and once you challenge the people that employ you, its goes bad, ask Jose... Plus Wenger lets fans know the situation he just fills it with riddles, so its not a direct blast. plus most people suspect Wenger got the funny hair dude sacked for saying we had 40m to spend when we obviously didnt... Fact of the matter is our financial situation is that we have to sign players that are a. big transfer fee/low-average wages, b. low transfer fee/big wages and c. structure our deals so much more than other "big" clubs. Fact is Arsenal are a catch 22 club. They are effectively "maxed out" finance wise, and if they obtain more credit it jeopardises their future, something the board refuse to do and would only probably do if Wenger insisted, and he wont do cos he knows money doesnt guarantee success, its too much of a risk, so we sit where we are, be prudent, and hope that a. we stay where we are and b. can win something/be succesful and a. is very much the more important factor in the eyes of the board because that unfortunately is the success of Arsenal Football Club.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this talk of the board 'lining their pockets' is stupid, pretty sure we have never paid out dividends to share holders (think this or next year we will do for the 1st time ever) so how are people lining there pockets.Only way you can make money off shares at Arsenal is by them gaining value which, will ultimately only happen if we are successful on the pitch. So don't know why people think the board are keeping money for themselves.Basically all this talk from dein, the board, whoever is irrelevant. The new stadium has to be paid for. If and when other teams build a state of the art 60,000 stadium you will probably see their investment in their squads fall. In this economic climate being prudent on something like squad members that doesn't guarantee a return is probably sensible.No other manager in the world could do what wenger has done for our club.p.s Hill wood is definately an old c*nt.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are paid wages... How much do you think they get for their roles... For performance bonuses? They are all executive roles and paid accordingly. Thats what I mean when I say lining their pockets.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are paid wages... How much do you think they get for their roles... For performance bonuses? They are all executive roles and paid accordingly. Thats what I mean when I say lining their pockets.
How much do u think they get paid!? Enough to give wenger £100m to spend? Like most directors imagine there salaray is relatively low and they make thier money through bonuses/dividends, which in the past arsenal have never paid. 'Lining thier pockets' just isn't an argument here.As i said the stadium has been the problem. Do people want us to take out a huge loan or a stadium then another huge loan to finance the buying of players (who won't guarantee us success anyway). Did people really expect to have the best stadium in the league and be able to buy the best players in the world all at the same time?Only thing u can really levy at the board at the moment is thier reluctance to take on too much risk and our poor movements developing the commercial side of our the club.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All this talk of the board 'lining their pockets' is stupid, pretty sure we have never paid out dividends to share holders (think this or next year we will do for the 1st time ever) so how are people lining there pockets.Only way you can make money off shares at Arsenal is by them gaining value which, will ultimately only happen if we are successful on the pitch. So don't know why people think the board are keeping money for themselves.Basically all this talk from dein, the board, whoever is irrelevant. The new stadium has to be paid for. If and when other teams build a state of the art 60,000 stadium you will probably see their investment in their squads fall. In this economic climate being prudent on something like squad members that doesn't guarantee a return is probably sensible.No other manager in the world could do what wenger has done for our club.p.s Hill wood is definately an old c*nt.
main ways u make money as a shareholder1. dividends2. share appreciationwhen fizsman sold his shares this year he gained £42m, EACH share was £8,500this was after he said he wouldnt sell his shares etcwhy did he make so much money cos investors like kroenke/usmanov are extremley hungry for a piece of thisthere using the situation to there advantadgeand the wages is an issue cos if kroenke/usmanov reach a certain % of shareswhich they aint far off, then a hostile takeover happensthen its up to the new owners who stays nd certain man would be gone (not that they wouldnt be able to live comfortably off the share sale, but there old cunts who want things done the old way)thats why they against usmanov
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All this talk of the board 'lining their pockets' is stupid, pretty sure we have never paid out dividends to share holders (think this or next year we will do for the 1st time ever)so how are people lining there pockets.Only way you can make money off shares at Arsenal is by them gaining value which, will ultimately only happen if we are successful on the pitch. So don't know why people think the board are keeping money for themselves.Basically all this talk from dein, the board, whoever is irrelevant. The new stadium has to be paid for. If and when other teams build a state of the art 60,000 stadium you will probably see their investment in their squads fall. In this economic climate being prudent on something like squad members that doesn't guarantee a return is probably sensible.No other manager in the world could do what wenger has done for our club.p.s Hill wood is definately an old c*nt.
main ways u make money as a shareholder1. dividends2. share appreciationwhen fizsman sold his shares this year he gained £42m, EACH share was £8,500this was after he said he wouldnt sell his shares etcwhy did he make so much money cos investors like kroenke/usmanov are extremley hungry for a piece of thisthere using the situation to there advantadge
So what's your point?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i was tryin to say is i agree we dont pay dividends so they aint makin money that waythey makin money by the value of there share increasing crazy amounts, and then they sellin them nd makin 42Mhe sold enough shares to make a big profit without selling enough to let them do a hostile takeoverthey being cleveras i said he sold his shares for 8,500 pound each, there value went up crazy as investors wanted a piecewhy did they go up so much?remba 2 years ago in an interview endleemen said arsene wenger has £70 m (yeh 70M) to spend if he wants lolthis signals to the potential investorsarsenal, a top 4 club, no external investment, new ground, and they still got 70m to spendthats why they was prepared to pay 8,500 per sharenow as there startin to look properly at the finances they realisin things aint as good as they were(see robert preston bbc article last week i posted)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are paid wages... How much do you think they get for their roles... For performance bonuses? They are all executive roles and paid accordingly. Thats what I mean when I say lining their pockets.
How much do u think they get paid!? Enough to give wenger £100m to spend? Like most directors imagine there salaray is relatively low and they make thier money through bonuses/dividends, which in the past arsenal have never paid. 'Lining thier pockets' just isn't an argument here.As i said the stadium has been the problem. Do people want us to take out a huge loan or a stadium then another huge loan to finance the buying of players (who won't guarantee us success anyway). Did people really expect to have the best stadium in the league and be able to buy the best players in the world all at the same time?Only thing u can really levy at the board at the moment is thier reluctance to take on too much risk and our poor movements developing the commercial side of our the club.
Smh, do you really think a director or anyone with an executive position at Arsenal is paid low? Why would the people that "run" a business that pays some of its employees over 4m a year be on low wages?! Lets just say man like Gazidas is on at least 1m a year minimum, dare I say he's touching near 2m including bonuses and he aint even at the top of the backroom scale.Smh, stop being dumb or I cant waste my time typing in response to you, who said they are taking money from Wenger pockets to spend? I said lining there own pockets by getting paid, cos you see when new owners come in they bring in new staff, new ways and reviews if certain current positions are actually needed... See Rick Parry. No takeover and he'd still be in a very well paid job at Liverpool.I think your missing the point, the way football is going and his age means the likes of Hill-Wood are going to get forced out. The fact we have two major shareholders buying out large stakes of the club tell you its going to happen, its just a matter of when. There seems to be a resistance from the current board as to when to do it for what would only appear to be their financial gain, be it after the Highbury properties are sold, Wenger leaves or a few years of the new shareholder dividends, who knows but it doesnt seem to have anything to do with supporting our manager and the clubs on the pitch performance.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smh, do you really think a director or anyone with an executive position at Arsenal is paid low? Why would the people that "run" a business that pays some of its employees over 4m a year be on low wages?! Lets just say man like Gazidas is on at least 1m a year minimum, dare I say he's touching near 2m including bonuses and he aint even at the top of the backroom scale.
Peter Hill-Wood gets paid 60k a year for his role as chairman you dunce. Bit of research and you could of found that. Or have you once again got the inside track? Gazidis is on more, but is irrelevant to your argument cos he isn't a director, he is paid as an employee. If you knew anything about business you'd know a lot of directors don't get paid a salary, again that is probably the case with a few of our directors.
I think your missing the point, the way football is going and his age means the likes of Hill-Wood are going to get forced out. The fact we have two major shareholders buying out large stakes of the club tell you its going to happen, its just a matter of when. There seems to be a resistance from the current board as to when to do it for what would only appear to be their financial gain, be it after the Highbury properties are sold, Wenger leaves or a few years of the new shareholder dividends, who knows but it doesnt seem to have anything to do with supporting our manager and the clubs on the pitch performance.
I was talking about Dein saying why don't the board say to wenger don't worry about cost. The reason they don't is cos we have a large debt on a stadium and as a strategic business decision it is not wise to increase that debt by buying players that could not make us any more successful than we are. They don't want to sell to an extent due to economic gain, but more so cos they don't want the club saddled with more debt like Man Utd and Liverpool have done. They worked too hard on the new stadium to just sell it on straight away even though football is going that way.
Smh, stop being dumb or I cant waste my time typing in response to you
Please don't. Most of the sh*t you spill onto this group is ill informed garbage anyway.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smh, do you really think a director or anyone with an executive position at Arsenal is paid low? Why would the people that "run" a business that pays some of its employees over 4m a year be on low wages?! Lets just say man like Gazidas is on at least 1m a year minimum, dare I say he's touching near 2m including bonuses and he aint even at the top of the backroom scale.
Peter Hill-Wood gets paid 60k a year for his role as chairman you dunce. Bit of research and you could of found that. Or have you once again got the inside track? Gazidis is on more, but is irrelevant to your argument cos he isn't a director, he is paid as an employee. If you knew anything about business you'd know a lot of directors don't get paid a salary, again that is probably the case with a few of our directors.
Evidence please...If Hill-Wood only takes 60k a year of Arsenal I'll have a new found respect for him, but I severely doubt he does, when Dein was on 1.5m a year (500k basic), & Edelman was given 1.7m when he left. But I'll await the source until then I'm laughing at 60k a year for the chairman of Arsenal.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/art...gain/article.do
An Old Etonian and ex-City banker, Hill-Wood, 71, is not like other football chairmen. His solid-framed spectacles give him an owlish air. He's got an uppercrustbooming voice. He doesn't have a chauffeur - at one point, he frets that his Saab, parked on a meter, will get a ticket. Neither does he have an office at the Emirates. For being Arsenal chairman, he is paid £60,000 a year.
Even if the source isn't 100% realiable i doubt they would either pick such a random salary or be able to play down it so much if it was a very high figure.Anyway my only point was Dein should know better than anyone why the board can't tell wenger not to worry about cost. They chose to reject his idea and if he is that big a fan of arsenal he should probably just keep quiet. I think eventually Kronke will take over, we're just doing it slowly. Nobody will be looking for huge investment now after they have put all the time and effort into the emirates. I also don't think Kronke will right off the amount of debt needed for us to compete with City, Chelsea etc anyway.Although i'm a huge fan of Dein, if we had a solid board after the emirates was built all going in the same direction we may have been in a better financial situation?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0