Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

What if sanctions against Usmanov where lifted in the near future?

Would you still want the vast sums of commercial sponsorship to continue?

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Milkman said:
I know, I think I was one of them too. My point being a moral one, nobody found his involvement with Everton so reprehensible before Ukraine. It's not like he just became this baddie when sanctions started is it.
Click to expand...

Well no, he hadn’t actually done anything morally wrong. Apart from the fact he de facto owned Everton in the shadows while also being on Arsenal’s board, which we had to hide. If we didn’t have to hide his ownership of the club then the sanctions would’ve forced us to sell like Abramovich was and we’d probably be clear of this mess now. The sanctions have crippled us because he was illegally involved with the club to begin with.
 
MikeH72 said:
Some of us were saying that writing off £100m+ losses every year was not a sustainable way to run a business actually. Some of us were critical about spending £45m on Sigurdsson, £27m on Tosun and £28m on Bolasie and were met with “it’s not your money lad why you arsed”.
Click to expand...

if plenty of fans could see that it wasn’t a sustainable way to run a business, and plenty of us could see that, then why couldn’t the accountants and the people running the club see that as well, the previous owner and his clique running the club were very happy to help spend this new money with not a thought of were the club were going with it. Unfortunately we the fans who really care about the club are the people who are suffering now because of them.
 
MikeH72 said:
Well no, he hadn’t actually done anything morally wrong. Apart from the fact he de facto owned Everton in the shadows while also being on Arsenal’s board, which we had to hide. If we didn’t have to hide his ownership of the club then the sanctions would’ve forced us to sell like Abramovich was and we’d probably be clear of this mess now. The sanctions have crippled us because he was illegally involved with the club to begin with.
Click to expand...

He wasnt on Arsenals board.
 
On the one hand, we wouldn't be in this financial mess right now, so welcoming his roubles back would be welcome in that regard.

However, the fact of the matter is that other than finally getting the stadium moving, Moshiri and Usmanov have demonstrated an almost comical lack of understanding about how to run a football club. They've been led by agents who wanted their slice of the pie and been blinded by who the biggest names were they could attract here.

Of far greater concern than not being skint currently is a well-run business and football club. Even though it's doing nothing for my stress levels, I actually think that the last couple of years and the current malaise are worth it just to get rid of Moshiri and the rotten lot and get back to running the business and the football side of it sensibly again. At the end of it, we'll have that new stadium we've known for decades that we've needed and the lunatics will no longer be running the asylum.

Whether 777 end up being any better is very much open for debate but, as investors, I do at least have confidence that they'll focus on running us well as a business and, given the guy in charge of the football side of what they do is the ex head of football operations with the City group, you'd assume that people with actual football expertise will be the ones making the football decisions.

In short, no, it's been painful but in the long run the political situation might end up working in our favour, as grim and horrifying as the events which have led to it have been.
 

roydo said:
Dont disagree, but he wasnt involved in any way with Arsenal.
Click to expand...

Mate, he owned 30% of the club. He actively bought shares off David Dein with his own money. His involvement with Everton was illegal and we really should’ve had the book thrown at us a lot earlier if we’re being honest. We were fortunate that the authorities turned a blind eye or couldn’t find sufficient enough proof to nail him.
 

toffeeblue9 said:
Of far greater concern than not being skint currently is a well-run business and football club. Even though it's doing nothing for my stress levels, I actually think that the last couple of years and the current malaise are worth it just to get rid of Moshiri and the rotten lot and get back to running the business and the football side of it sensibly again. At the end of it, we'll have that new stadium we've known for decades that we've needed and the lunatics will no longer be running the asylum.

Whether 777 end up being any better is very much open for debate but, as investors, I do at least have confidence that they'll focus on running us well as a business and, given the guy in charge of the football side of what they do is the ex head of football operations with the City group, you'd assume that people with actual football expertise will be the ones making the football decisions.
Click to expand...
This sums up my thoughts too - surviving as a business is more important than challenging at the top - yes they're in it to make money, but who isn't? It goes back to this local mentality - if we want someone who's only in it to make Everton a successful team (and to make money, this has to happen, at least in terms of us not being relegated and getting back to a stable position), then we're back to local owners with no money.

Just having football people making football decisions is a huge improvement. I just feel we have a lot of the "well when are they going to get us challenging for top 4" mentality in our fanbase. That is so so unlikely whoever comes in
 
MikeH72 said:
Mate, he owned 30% of the club. He actively bought shares off David Dein with his own money. His involvement with Everton was illegal and we really should’ve had the book thrown at us a lot earlier if we’re being honest. We were fortunate that the authorities turned a blind eye or couldn’t find sufficient enough proof to nail him.
Click to expand...

I know. But when another bloke owns 70%, his influence was zero.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top