Date: 12th September 2007 at 9:06am
Written by:

Danny Fiszman, Arsenal’s largest single shareholder will not be selling his stake in the club.

Rumour had it that Fiszman was to sell his shareholings to the highest bidder at a time when interest in the North London club is at it’s premium.

Thankfully, Danny has nipped it in the bud and confirmed with The Times (a better paper choice than Peter Hill-Woods Daily Star) that the thought never crossed his mind.

‘I am not about to sell my stake,’ Fiszman said in The Times. ‘I have not set a price because I haven’t thought about selling.

‘Moving to the Emirates Stadium was like moving into a dream home.’

 

25 Replies to “Fiszman – Not For Sale”

  • We have some of the best young players in world football and massive money coming in from t.v deals and a 60,000 stadium. Why on earth would the board need to sell at this time?? The Highbury development is well underway and the ‘re-mortgage’ payments are more than covered with natural income, so again I stress that we have no need to sell. I can see why we’d be subject to speculation because of the healthy position of the club and the potential to infiltrate the asian and far-east markets, but all of our ambitions can and will be fulfilled by the current board.

  • Rocky, did you get the e mail from AISA? I got it last night and they ‘ve sent a full transcript of what Fiszman said to them as well as the AST’s position on the affair. I’ve got to say I’m very enthused by Hiull Wood and Fiszman’s comments, in the long term a takeover makes no sense at all.

  • Another plus point that I didn’t mention was the fact we have a manager that doesn’t spend money. An erection inducer for any tight arsed board member.

  • I did get it but not had a chance to read it yet LD, I’ll have a butchers and rehash or produce another article.

  • The whole thing about the dein affair that is really getting to me is the fact that he’s making out we are in the same position as villa or Chavski who needed to be sold in order to attract the sort of money they have needed to compete. Even forgetting the fact we have the don of a manager who develops stars rather than buying them, we are not in that position. Assuming we keep having a modicum of success we are in a fantastic position in terms of credit and revenue generation and the reason that people want to buy us is that we are in a position to make them bucket loads of money without them having to put in the work/ investment that we’ve seen at Chelsea or Man City. In short a sale will bring nothing to the club… not because it can’t – of course it can – but because any of the sharks that are currently circling will be in it too make an easy buck.

  • Back in 2001 when the new stadium looked a risk, and the money men were ridiculing the expense of building in islington as opposed to outside the M25 citing that broadcasting revenues were more important than fans, investors were few and far between. It’s easy to forget that finance was not that readily available and the board had to work very hard to get the initial finance in place and to restructure that finance at key stages of the development. Wenger understood the logic and built his team strategy on prudent spending and youth investment accepting the restrictions that the farsighted investment plans demanded. 5 years later, after the stadium opened, the ‘investors’ now see that we can fill the capacity with an entertaining and attractive brand of football. They now see that taking the risk of staying true to our roots has paid off, that Wenger has astutely managed the team without sacrificing our ability to compete in the medium and long term. In short they now see that the current board and management were brave, bold and right. Finances look positive for the future and only now these ‘investors’ so concerned about the clubs future now, though not when it looked riskier, want a slice of the action. The reality is we don’t need them now, the time has passed when finances looked challenging, and we should resist these fairweather ‘investors’ for as long as the current board feel motivated and supported to continue to do so. They have earned our support.

  • Just hope Fiszman is true to his word. Many of us might agree on not needing to be sold, but hopefully we will start to see some cracks in the plans of those that have gone down the takeover route. If there is any truth in the recent stories about the Glazers, and they were to cut and run inside the next year or so, it might tell business-people everywhere that buying out clubs is not a simple road to riches. That might help signify the peak of the takeover mania gripping the EPL. As PHW sort of said himself: “how far can the lunacy on transfers and wages possibly go?”

  • The Glazers were so desperate to get instant funding that they tracked their loan rates to sterling libors and not base rates. With the current discontent in the cash markets the libors have shot up enormously. I can’t believe that they chose to borrow in this way as there has been constant speculation for years that ABS (asset backed securities) were about to crash, therefore causing heavy liquidity problems. Believe me, we are far better off with our prudent and diligent board than haphazard mismanagent like this.

  • It will be interesting to read all of PHWs comments, Rocky. I read a few days back that there was talk of Fiszman actually winding up some of his other business interest so that he could spend more time at Arsenal. I am also opposed to the take-over (the reasons are better articulated by others on this site). The only concern about a take-over was the speculation regarding Fiszman’ intentions after the change in his tax status next year. Good to see that bit of speculation put to rest.

  • Hatespur – that only puts in perspective the sterling work (pardon the pun) done by our Board. I believe our loan of £210M is a fixed rate loan at about 5.79%, so all the increase in libors does not impact Arsenal’s cash flow. Another example of the financial acument of the men currently running the club.

  • I have little or no understanding of all this financial jargon, but as long as Arsene Wenger is in charge there is no need for investment at this club. Don’t get me wrong, if someone came in who would do things right then I would not be opposed, but I just don’t see the need. If Arsenal ever needed an investor, now is not the time as things will only get better from here…….if it’s not broken and all that *****.

  • A libor is the interest rate banks charge each other for borrowing each others cash. That rate goes up when banks are scared of lending each other money, which is what is happening now. Why? They realise they have sold too many mortgages/loans etc to their customers who are struggling to pay them back, and as defaults rise, and cash dries up things get a bit paralysed. Part of the Glazer loan is libor-backed which explains some of their problems with the present high interest they are having to pay. I’m no expert but with global markets are not looking great, and if it worsens the Galzers will have even more serious problems. The other problem they have of course is they are a business first and foremost, and have little if any love for their ‘vehicle’, and this appears to be rubbing off on their fans who seem to be steadily declining season tickets and price hikes. It makes our club look like a bloody oasis!

  • What really grates is that Dein opposed the new stadium as he didn’t see the club being able to compete whilst building it. He was proved incorrect and now the stadium is gonna start bringing the mula in, David the Saviour and creator of all living things wants a piece of the pie. Touchez hatespur, but I would mention I no longer work in the eductaion profession. And if Sir Harry, kernowboy or whatever their current incarnation is, you didn’t get me sacked. However, I am now a porn star, so if I write anything you disagree with, feel free to report me to the porn stars union.

  • I’m all for the no investors, but I always think it would be nice to be able to splash out once in a while and sign a player who really lifts everything and gets the excitement going. Someone big superstar signing. Kinda like we did when we signed Reyes (not wanting to get into the whole Reyes debate though lol). Better example would be Liverpool with Torres or Tevez to United.

  • This is beginning to read like the FT (at least it was until LD told us about his new profession. I hope you have got a big part in the next production LD!). We aren’t entirely unaffected by increased Libor rates ourselves. Of The £260mn of bonds issued £210mn were at a fixed rate of 5.1418% and £50mn at a floating rate of Libor plus 0.22%. On the scale of things though this isn’t too significant and the fixed rate is below the current base rate of 5.75%.

  • That’s all very well but the pitfalls of signing a big player are rather numerous. The huge pressure on them, the ego, a lot of the time they end up dragging things down as they get bigger wages and that effects team spririt, especially if they don’t deliver. I don’t think the signings of Shevchenko, Ballack or Cole contributed to a lift at the Bridge. The thing we have to do as supporters, particularly while Wenger is in charge, is trust that if the manager buys a player it’s because he thinks he will work for the club and not get sucked in by the media hype surrounding a player. Football fans always go nuts about the likes of Torres, Ronaldinho, Kaka etc, etc. But I’m willing to wager most of us see those players play an entire 90 minute game possibly two or three times a year tops. A manager like Wenger will watch a player dozens and dozens of times before making a decision on him.

Comments are closed.