From the Guardian:
Le'Arse has big boardroom issues after a squable has seen a big stakeholder look for the exit:
Arsenal stake up for grabs after director's surprise departure
• Future of 15.9% Gunners shareholding in doubt
• Former board member no longer party to 'lockdown' agreement
Arsenal's boardroom last night suffered its second fracture in less than two years, casting fresh uncertainty over the club's future ownership.
Nina Bracewell-Smith, who owns 15.9% of Arsenal — with an estimated value of £50m — has been removed from the board after three years as a director. The decision followed what is believed to have been a major argument with her fellow directors and there is now uncertainty as to whether her stake is up for sale.
Bracewell-Smith has also left the shareholders' lockdown agreement that is meant to provide stability to directors' holdings. She said in October that she had "never considered selling" her shares in Arsenal. But to take that on trust is a risky strategy for Arsenal's board, which last year saw David Dein sell his stake for £75m to the Russian oligarch Alisher Usmanov.
Arsenal directors are gambling that in the current economic climate Usmanov has neither the will nor the wherewithal to buy Bracewell-Smith's shares. Currently less than 30% of the shares in issue are formally tied in to the lockdown. But Arsenal's old-guard directors, led by Danny Fiszman, may have calculated that their alliance with the American Stan Kroenke and his 12.4% holding meant they could afford to ostracise Bracewell-Smith.
In the past Usmanov has made clear he has no intention of buying a majority shareholding in Arsenal but yesterday's events appear to have altered that stance. A spokesman for Usmanov's Red & White Holdings investment vehicle said: "We are watching developments with interest."
If Usmanov were to acquire Bracewell-Smith's stake he would be forced under stockmarket rules to make an offer for the whole club as his holding would exceed the 29.9% threshold for investment stakes.
Arsenal's chairman, Peter Hill-Wood, suggested existing directors may buy Bracewell-Smith's shares if she sells but said he hoped she will not: "A number of the board have indicated in the past that they are interested in buying more shares so the future stability of the club is secure."
Tensions had existed between Bracewell-Smith and some of her fellow directors for some time but she had been involved in the interview panel for the chief executive's position, a post now occupied by Ivan Gazidis, who will formally take up his directorship in January.
Honestly, google this Usmanov bloke, he is the dead spit of the fat bloke in Borat.
Back onto the issue at hand, here's a comment (admitedly from a fellow Yid) that I think is fairly close to the mark:
The problem with implosions, much like the unrest at West Ham, is that some **** off Arab (or in Arsenal's case, Russian) will just appear at the last minute and buy them out for lots and lots of money, then giving them even more money to spend on transfers.
I think Arsenal have been excellently run and they hardly ever make multi million pound signings, yet are always challenging. To be honest, i won't even begrudge them if another Abramovich did come along and gave them stupid amounts of money to spend. It's teams like Chelsea, who were on the verge of going bust because of bad management,
and West Ham, who buy players like Lucas Neill on 70k a week and loads of other massively overpaid tosh, that piss me off. 
I still think we're excellently run and sooner rather than later, we'll be purchased by a multi trillionaire. But we'll deserve it too.
So, unfortunately, even if it did go tits up at Arsenal, there will always be someone ready to step in with lots and lots of money. And that's all that matters nowadays
The only possible saving grace is that they'll be much less of an attractive proposition when they're not in Europe next season.... 
still dont think he is any chop
