David Hytner
guardian.co.uk

Can Arsenal enjoy the success that their supporters crave with the self‑sustaining business model?

This question underpins almost every discussion in relation to the club. The fans have long wished to see a greater degree of speculation – on the transfer market – in order to accumulate and they have been concerned at how the Manchester clubs, Chelsea, Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur have demonstrated their financial clout. There was the call here for an equity injection up to 2014, when Arsenal will be able to renegotiate their major commercial deals, in the hope that it would help to attract some high‑quality players. Yet the members of the board are utterly resolute, believing that living within the club’s means is the only way forward. They refuse to mortgage the club’s future by spending vast sums on new signings and have placed great faith in the incoming financial fair play rules. The club are working instead to develop revenue streams, with the pre-season tour to east Asia being advanced as one success. They will not consider a short-term injection of capital.

Peter Hill-Wood out, David Dein back?

Hill-Wood caused no little mirth when he forgot the fifth and final resolution on the agenda, which was the retention of Stan Kroenke on the board; a scrawled reminder was hastily passed to him. But Arsenal’s venerable chairman was not laughing when one shareholder asked for his resignation and the return of David Dein, the former vice‑chairman, drawing a hearty round of applause. The shareholder said that Hill‑Wood did not deserve the privileges that came with his position. Dein is considered, rightly, to be an industry player; a man familiar with every back street of European football; a facilitator who can make deals happen. The theory goes that with him at the helm, the club would not have endured such a turbulent summer. But would the removal of Hill‑Wood change anything? He is more a custodian, a figurehead, with deep and distinguished family ties to Arsenal and, if anything, the call for the change at the top was uncomfortable for Ivan Gazidis, the chief executive, who runs the club on a day-to-day basis, on Kroenke’s behalf. For the record, Hill‑Wood has «no intention of standing down».

Did Arsène Wenger get it right with his incoming summer transfer business?

In very simple terms, Arsenal lost two world-class players in the summer and failed to sign anyone who merited the same billing. In financial terms, they made a profit of £22m, with £73.4m raised through the 12 players who left and the nine arrivals costing £51.4m. A curiosity was that Joel Campbell featured on both the incoming and outgoing lists. It is generally accepted that Cesc Fábregas and Samir Nasri were irreplaceable but Wenger’s signings have so far failed to quicken the pulse. Hill-Wood name-checked Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Mikel Arteta, Per Mertesacker, André Santos and Gervinho as «the ones you know most» but all of them have fired, at best, in only fits and starts. Wenger’s defence, though, was robust. He warned the critics not to judge anybody prematurely and he offered a reminder that certain superstars have had slow starts at the club. He did not mention names but he may have been referring to Thierry Henry, Dennis Bergkamp and Robert Pires.

Have the ticket price rises at the Emirates Stadium been justified?

The decision to hike prices by 6.5% was always going to be controversial in the current economic climate and it has come to feel more so in light of Wenger’s summer net spend. One shareholder asked pointedly whether the prices would be reduced next season, if the club failed to qualify for the Champions League. Hill‑Wood ducked that one, as he did several other issues. But Wenger, in his scene‑stealing rallying cry, argued that the increases were a necessary evil for the club to have the chance to retain their existing stars. «Unfortunately, it is the real situation that we face,» Wenger said. The fans will hope their money helps to keep Robin van Persie beyond 2013.

Should Alisher Usmanov be granted a seat on the board?

The Uzbek billionaire owns a little under 30% of the shares through his Red & White Holdings vehicle but he is something of an outsider. He has sought to ingratiate himself with the fans by proposing a £100m cash injection via a share issue, for spending on new players, and also positioning himself against the concept of the self-sustaining business model. Hence the calls for him to be appointed as a director. But they have been rejected and they continue to be met with resistance, with Hill-Wood speaking of being «comfortable with the constitution of the board» and having no wish to change it. The chairman talked of every director «caring deeply about the long-term future of the club» and wanting «the very best» for it. The suggestion was that Usmanov does not.