Hi, welcome to BR
As per this comment that you left on my Bulletin Board:
"After reading your saga on the RVP situation, I was wondering who you would prefer to be in charge (Kroenke or Usmanov) or what type of owner should be in charge of Arsenal at the moment."
My problem with Kroenke is that he hasn't defined a specific beneficial vision for Arsenal, aside from his promise not to load Arsenal with debt.
If his investment consists merely in his shares, I do not see how this benefits Arsenals. His presence, according to this model, is no different than if the former shareholders had remained. The implication, as I say in the article, is that Kroenke is simply there to benefit himself. As Arsenal appreciates in value so do his shares, which he can sell anytime he likes.
Therefore, I'd like to hear what Kroenke has to say about his vision for Arsenal, what he can do in the immediate future to help Arsenal at this period when clubs are jostling for supremacy.
While one can't possibly know his motives, except insofar as his actions reveal them (such as his ill-advised letter), my fear is that he'd be no different than Roman Abramovich of Chelsea. But except the fact that Arsenal would abandon their heritage, their tradition, if his intention is to simply dish out some money, who can say no to easy money?
However I'm not sure that he isn't there for his own enrichment either. Neither am I sure I want to be the play thing of a billionaire.
Ideally, I'd like to see us return to the former model of joint ownership, where the stakes are there for the love of the club. Sure, some might sell them at future times and make huge profit, that's understandable. Joint ownership based solely on love will bring balance. Some will be biased towards the business aspect and other towards the footballing aspect. It is the balance between the two extremes that makes for a healthy club.
That's what I believe.