Alisher Usmanov

[Khalekan]

Isn't Moshiri good enough on his own?

Good enough but not rich enough

 

[TheFinnFan]

Who is really saying he isn't?

Only kopites

 

[orly]

He's been tagged and he's been tagged in many a previous post.

You're obsessed with him, sadly it's unrequited love

 

[R934]

You're obsessed with him, sadly it's unrequited love

Maybe so, but I'll never truly love someone who keeps 'secrets'

 

[DRINGO]

well he's not gonna come out in public and say he wants to sell up is he ?

 

[PhilM]

Maybe so, but I'll never truly love someone who keeps 'secrets'

I'm not saying do not have your doubts or questions, in fact I think you're more than fair for having your own concerns regarding the legitimacy.

What I do find uneasy however, is that it appears many are swaying from legitimate and justified suspicion to rampant and aggressive paranoia.

Ultimately, The Esk has simply expressed his opinion on a subject based on his account of what he's heard from an apparent close source.

Now it's up to you whether you take that as gospel, as an aspect of a balanced perspective or simply dismiss it; it doesn't have to become a trial.

Due to the transfer saga people like yourself are now openly contentious about his reliability, and as such are demanding he disclose his source.

I'm sorry but you simply can't infer guilt because he has not, or will not, respond to disclosing his source. There may be legitimate reasons why.

And that reverts back to the aspect of taking it as gospel etc. For example, with regards to your point of apparently having fingers in many pies.

Could not one high-ranking financial source at the club or someone linked to the board have information that covers the multitude of information?

I'm not saying that is the case, yet I've simply inferred from what I have read and combine it with other opinions to make my own decision.

Put simply you've got to make your own mind up on what is happening using a number of different sources to help you - Esk can be one.

It does not however have to become some form of witch-hunt or drumhead trial along the way, as fans are now easily turning on each other.

 

[bluestevon]

I'm not saying do not have your doubts or questions, in fact I think you're more than fair for having your own concerns regarding the legitimacy.

What I do find uneasy however, is that it appears many are swaying from legitimate and justified suspicion to rampant and aggressive paranoia.

Ultimately, The Esk has simply expressed his opinion on a subject based on his account of what he's heard from an apparent close source.

Now it's up to you whether you take that as gospel, as an aspect of a balanced perspective or simply dismiss it; it doesn't have to become a trial.

Due to the transfer saga people like yourself are now openly contentious about his reliability, and as such are demanding he disclose his source.

I'm sorry but you simply can't infer guilt because he has not, or will not, respond to disclosing his source. There may be legitimate reasons why.

And that reverts back to the aspect of taking it as gospel etc. For example, with regards to your point of apparently having fingers in many pies.

Could not one high-ranking financial source at the club or someone linked to the board have information that covers the multitude of information?

I'm not saying that is the case, yet I've simply inferred from what I have read and combine it with other opinions to make my own decision.

I don't even understand why people are in THIS thread having a go at esk about sources etc mate, he has always stated that his view on Usmanov is not 'itk' or in anyway, shape or form anything other than his own opinion on the situation.

 

[Bullet]

There's a few different ways it can all be looked at, and depending on that slant, it produces a completely different feeling to the chances and likelihood of it happening.

From a pure business POV it can be argued that 'why would he do it', or the difficulty entailed in trying to offload his Arsenal stake in order to free him to invest/own us. just looked at in those terms then both sides can argue back and forth with mixed results on who is 'right' or 'wrong'.

Can be looked at from a pure - Moshiri/Usmanov relationship in the past angle, which then makes it seem much more likely, - well they have always done thigns together, why wouldnt they now etc,

My own take is a lot of the time we are forgetting what in reality owning a football club means to someone like Usmanov - who is 100% a sport and football nut, he's made numerous charitable donations to sports organisations and basically funded the entire Russian fencing program out his own pocket - due to a love for that sport as well, when he was in charge of Gazrom they embarked on a massive excersise of Sporting involvement, owning Zenit, sponsoring several other teams both at home and abroad, the guy honetsly loves the game. People overlook this and see him as someone who is content now to sit twiddling his thumbs owning shares with no control, power or say are overlooking the fact that he loves the game.

Now why does a Oligarch such as him get involved in the first place - heard stuff abotu money laundering etc, which in Abramovic case had a element of truth and a lot of fabrication attached to it, the safety of having a high profile was a more valid reason in that example, Usmanov is a different type altogether - he wasn't one of the land grabbers who got rich quick in the post soviet collapse (although it helped him) and a hutge ammount of his money has been made through other investements - google etc, and through legitimate investment in companies such as Megafon.

He is wanting to control a club because it's a passion and dream that he 'and' Moshiri have seemingly shared for at least 10 years - it's hard for us normal people who basically live day to day financially in some caes to comprehend the vast amount of wealth he has, and the fact that buying a football club and throwing millions into it, is like one of us buying a ps4 and our investment being buying games when we fancy them, that in essence what the money is to him, leisure money to induldge something he has a passion for and enjoys. For ten years he's been stuck in a suituation that he can't do what he wants and has no hope of ever doing so - IF we are led to believe it is Moshiri acting alone, then Usmanovs closest advisor and friend decided after consulting with Usmanov (which he had to do to agree the shares selling etc in R&W holdings) to go it alone and leave Usmanov to endure the never ending frustration of his situation at Arsenal.

That to me doesn't sit right at all, why would Usmanov all of a sudden have a change of heart about his long held dream - which staying permanently at Arsenal with no power would be?
Why would Usmanov ignore the advice of Moshiri about them both leaving Arsenal and buying another club - which with a million degree of certainty would have been a conversation that they had, no chance on earth Moshiri goes 'Al i'm leaving your buying, i'm going it alone on what we planned for the last ten years', so why wouldn't Usmanov be interested in finally realsiing that shared ambition - he suddenly after 30 years decides that he doesn't want to take that step with Moshiri? - just doesn't hold up when you think about it in those terms

So we can think about the difficulty in Usmanov offloading his shares etc (overstated by those who argue the case for Nyet IMO), what can't be argued though is the fact that two very close friends who have worked like siamese twins in business for 30 years, had a shared dream to own a club, one of those men with the others help is now doing so, and anyone who thinks Usmanov wouldn't want to be a part of that and Moshiri wouldn't want him to be alongside him as they do it, is misjudging the entire relationship between the two guys.

To use a wierd analogy, before we move from Goodision i want to see the place one last time and get back for a match, i also want my now 2 year old son to see Everton play for the first time at Goodison before we move as thats a memory and experience i want him to always have. If the chance came for me to get back - but without him with me and go to a game, i wouldn't go, purely because i want to do that with him, and without it wouldn't feel the same. If you take emotion out of it then yeah i should just go no matter what as i want to do it and it makes sense, but you can't remove emotion from the situation some times and i am convinced that owning a club together is like this with these two 'friends'

A compelling argument. I've always believed it's probable and the mooted £100m budget reinforced this as it did not tally with Moshiri's wealth level. Unfortunately the £100m hasn't materialised.
What timescale do you envisage? I don't see Usmanov overlapping with BK so if it happens I think it'll be after the exercising of the option to increase shares to circa 75% and this may be dependent on progress with the stadium.
Based upon the aspirations for Arsenal set down in their famous open letter what do you envisage a Moshiri / Usmanov partnership would mean at EFC?

 

[PhilM]

I don't even understand why people are in THIS thread having a go at esk about sources etc mate,

The source aspect I was referring to comes from the transfer threads, which has induced suspicion that has spread into other discussions.

Instead of seeing Esk as an opinion many fans unfortunately took his word as gospel, and due to the transfers people have swung the other way.

 

[blulouie]

So you not one bit curious as to the vast claims made by the @The Esk.
He seemingly has his fingers in many a pie:
- Trasfers
- Finance
- Moshiri
- Usmanov
- Stadium Developments
- Liverpool Council
- The Board
- Takeovers
- Stan Kronke
- Commercial deals

And maybe, just maybe someone should question the legitimacy. Like I've said before, all the esk needs to do is answer a simple question which puts everything to bed.
If its down to 'sensitivity' then similarly why reveal anything in the first place.

Can't have it both ways and expect people to buy into it. The esk knows people worship his words and he's playing a fanbase.

And to typify matters hides behind other people who defend his unfounded claims, whilst shooting downs others who dare question a forum god.

Maybe I'm new to this, maybe I've not be indoctrinated into the wonderful world of esk just yet. Either way, if you class questioning someone's vagueness as having a go, then by all means I'm having a go.

Think you need to find something better to do with your life.....this is becoming obsessive now.

 

[bluestevon]

A compelling argument. I've always believed it's probable and the mooted £100m budget reinforced this as it did not tally with Moshiri's wealth level. Unfortunately the £100m hasn't materialised.
What timescale do you envisage? I don't see Usmanov overlapping with BK so if it happens I think it'll be after the exercising of the option to increase shares to circa 75% and this may be dependent on progress with the stadium.
Based upon the aspirations for Arsenal set down in their famous open letter what do you envisage a Moshiri / Usmanov partnership would mean at EFC?

Share buyout will 100% happen first, new stadium site will be 100% signed and sealed also, Usmanov won't take any even slight risk of leaving one mess to join another, Moshiri will have to have sorted both thigns out, then it's a simple matter of sell at Arsenal and buying into Blue Heaven holdings as an equal partner.

So a guestimate on timeline would be later this year to early next - maybe stretching till the summer before it falls into place.

The source aspect I was referring to comes from the transfer threads, which has induced suspicion that has spread into other discussions.

Instead of seeing Esk as an opinion many fans unfortunately took his word as gospel, and due to the transfers people have swung the other way.

A shame really, on a lot if matters he has a lot of insight and us a very articulate poster, especially finances etc.

Obviously I disagree hugely on this threads issue, but imo that's the great thing about forums, the ability to debate two dramatically different POV.

 

[Bullet]

Isn't Moshiri good enough on his own?

Moshiri's great and will save us from regressing to the periennial relegation battlers that we were pre Moyes which I believe was slowly happening.
We should now, within a couple of years, get back up to the Moyes level of challenging for Europe and for this I'm profoundly grateful.
Barring getting very lucky though it's hard to see how we can become consistently competitive with the rich elite without the huge financial investment that an Usmanov could afford.

 

[R934]

I'm not saying do not have your doubts or questions, in fact I think you're more than fair for having your own concerns regarding the legitimacy.

What I do find uneasy however, is that it appears many are swaying from legitimate and justified suspicion to rampant and aggressive paranoia.

Ultimately, The Esk has simply expressed his opinion on a subject based on his account of what he's heard from an apparent close source.

Now it's up to you whether you take that as gospel, as an aspect of a balanced perspective or simply dismiss it; it doesn't have to become a trial.

Due to the transfer saga people like yourself are now openly contentious about his reliability, and as such are demanding he disclose his source.

I'm sorry but you simply can't infer guilt because he has not, or will not, respond to disclosing his source. There may be legitimate reasons why.

And that reverts back to the aspect of taking it as gospel etc. For example, with regards to your point of apparently having fingers in many pies.

Could not one high-ranking financial source at the club or someone linked to the board have information that covers the multitude of information?

I'm not saying that is the case, yet I've simply inferred from what I have read and combine it with other opinions to make my own decision.

Put simply you've got to make your own mind up on what is happening using a number of different sources to help you - Esk can be one.

It does not however have to become some form of witch-hunt or drumhead trial along the way, as fans are now easily turning on each other.

Again I appriciate the reply.

I'd say its not more paranoia then others who openly criticise those classed as 'wum' or 'popcorning'.

Amongst all this @The Esk has a platform of which people flock to guague his opinion. It may not be fact, but the esk does a good job convincing otherwise and shoots down something outside his remit of thought.

Those who are classed as 'wum', 'popcorning' etc are no different to the esk. So its hypocrisy, more so when people are going out of there way to defend someone.

If a public forum isn't the correct medium to question someones post, then there is no purpose for this platform.

As ive said before, if the source is so 'sensitve' then nothing should be revealed.
When information, however vaugue, is in the public domain it is open to interpretations, which can adversely affect his source.
Why is the esk willing to jeopardise an individual(s) job by leaking information?

You can't have sensitive information and leak it, then hide behind a vail when questioned - its sitting on the fence.

I'm not overly bothered regarding the esks transfer saga, I've always held a justifiable reason to ask a question.

The fact you have answered for the esk is part and parcel of his persona on here. He doesn't need to reply, others will do it for him.
If you have an escalated platform to spout information, then retain some credibility and answer a question - even if its to rebuff everything, but that opportunity has not been done.

As ive said, those who make claims get shot down, but the esk remains a demi-god of the forum for doing the exact same.

We're all blues, but some like to pretend their privy to information to escalate themselves.

No shame it not knowing something, and know shame is questioning those that claim too.

 

[R934]

Think you need to find something better to do with your life.....this is becoming obsessive now.

Obsessive as in ive asked I think at most 4 / 5 times over two days. Each time relavtive to a new claim by @The Esk.

Obessive as in ive done the respectable thing and replied to someones questioning of my post? Sure thats how a forum works.

But I'll play by your rules...

Why do you feel the need the defend someone, who could easily have answered the question from the start? I think you need to find something better do with your life, spending your time defending a faceless avatar over the internet - oh the humanity.

 

[chicoazul]

I've took the piss out of it before but the Eskimos genuinely are turning into what I was unfairly goading. The lad @R934 has come on and been articulate enough and he's getting crap for it? I reckon @The Esk welcomes the balance of debate too so it just looks trite if he's getting shouted down for his concerns, whether unfounded or not. Like I got jumped on a few months ago by the devotees.

Nothing is ever 100%, I was out with a fella who is very ITK (met his sources) last night and he said that the Usmanov thing looks on.

Who knows?