There's been a lot of press huffing and puffing - it even made the papers on our Antipodean shores - about Silent Stan's takeover ambitions. Curiously though, and I suspect many Gooners may feel the same, considering the lack of concern over this move, the closer he gets to the magic 30 per cent, the far less concerned I am that he has any serious plans to take over.

The first thing that leads me to this conclusion is that it would undoubtedly be a bad business move. Football clubs may carry prestige for their owners, but they're not what you'd call cash cows. Ask Hicks and Gillette. This may be slightly different at Arsenal, but the global financial crisis makes our club a special case. If rumours are true and the global financial crisis has hit the club's Highbury Square development hard, then a sole owner would be buying his way into a company which still owes a substantial debt. Yet, despite this, because of the resoluteness of the current board to maintain the current ownership structure, the value of shares at the present time does not reflect the state of the company, so there is no ability for anyone to buy in cheap while the economy is on the rocks.

The second and overwhelming reason that I think Stan has no serious takeover ambitions, at least for the time being, is that his latest acquisition of shares came directly from Peter Hill Wood. The newfound love between the two must say something for Silent Stan's intentions. Whatever you or I may think of PHW, he has always remained steadfast in his support of the current ownership structure.

So why then, is Stan edging closer to the takeover threshold? The answer is simple - about 300 pounds and hails from Uzbekistan. If Kroenke maintains a position a handful of shares away from a compulsory takeover bid, Usmanov and David Dein's stated intentions become more or less academic. To me, and hopefully to the rest of you Gooners, Stan's recent amassing of shares is very much a defensive position, and his doing so appears to have been backed by the current board all the way. Usamanov will now know that he is effectively incapable of making a play for the company, because Stan holds a more sturdy position.

And why are the board letting him do it, when he could easily decided to go back on whatever word he's given them in a year or two and continue to amass shares? Quite simply, because mandatory takeover bids are not mandatory takeovers. Financial regulations state that because 30 per cent of a company can be considered a controlling interest, minority shareholders who feel they will no longer have a say in the running of the company should be given the chance to sell their shares on terms equivalent to those for which previous shares were purchased. It does not mean that Stan would automatically become an Abramovich-style autocrat, nor does it mean that any of the current board would be compelled to sell their shares. He would indeed be in a strong position, but the current board, united, could still control the club.

Whatever the circumstances, the bottom line in the situation is this: it appears the Arsenal board of directors has extended the welcome mat to Stan, and that they see him as a long-term board member and majority shareholder in the club. That has to be positive news for anyone who shares the same multi-owner philosophy that the board have championed for some time.