Jump to content

coda

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Only2McInallys said:

I think Tottenham(unbelievably) and Arsenal both have much bigger fan bases,Chelsea have to advertise on the radio to sell tickets for European games.

They are able to sustain losses of up to £100 million only due to RA.They do have a fantastic academy and are making big profits from loans and sales of young players which keeps them inside limits of FFP.

Their financial model is totally dependent on RA’s bankrolling.

You would think they will have to sanction RA and this will be the end of them being a top 4 club.You could see them being another Leeds circa 2005.

I thought Chelsea just about scraped the end of the glory hunters here, I know a few young ones in kiddy

Also from my experience at away games they've more obviously captured the day trippers and tourists than spurs or arsenal, you can see the family day trippers, I've also been at Gatwick on a Saturday morning and seen a Norwegian Air flight land with a few Chelsea families getting off, the only place I've seen comparable to Chelsea was Fulham 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Only2McInallys said:

I think Tottenham(unbelievably) and Arsenal both have much bigger fan bases,Chelsea have to advertise on the radio to sell tickets for European games.

They are able to sustain losses of up to £100 million only due to RA.They do have a fantastic academy and are making big profits from loans and sales of young players which keeps them inside limits of FFP.

Their financial model is totally dependent on RA’s bankrolling.

You would think they will have to sanction RA and this will be the end of them being a top 4 club.You could see them being another Leeds circa 2005.

Traditional fan bases but globally Chelsea are ahead because of the recent success. Arsenal isnt far behind then

I think they will be ok if Marina is not sanctioned or is forced to leave. She pretty much runs the club and its ran well obviously with Abramovich approval

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, blandy said:

It’s a mix. In the past he’s done the same as our owners - converting debt to equity. I think I read that when UEFA FFP came in, or around that time, he wrote off nearly all the debt the club owed him. Obviously since then he’s subsequently loaned them a load more, but I just thought I’d be pedantic.

I guess their longer term future will depend on the degree to which he'll write off the debt - he has I think developed a genuinely care for the place over his now twenty year tenure - he might surprise some by simply letting a big chunk of the debt disappear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

I guess their longer term future will depend on the degree to which he'll write off the debt - he has I think developed a genuinely care for the place over his now twenty year tenure - he might surprise some by simply letting a big chunk of the debt disappear. 

The open question I think is if he still loves the place if he can't enter the country for a year or three.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

The open question I think is if he still loves the place if he can't enter the country for a year or three.

Or if the original reasons he bought them are to be believed whether or not he actually needs them anymore... What purpose does owning Chelsea serve him now? 

No matter what it is I thought the rich man play thing angle had been put to bed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During my nearly 20-year ownership of Chelsea FC, I have always viewed my role as a custodian of the Club, whose job it is ensuring that we are as successful as we can be today, as well as build for the future, while also playing a positive role in our communities. I have always taken decisions with the Club’s best interest at heart. I remain committed to these values. That is why I am today giving trustees of Chelsea’s charitable Foundation the stewardship and care of Chelsea FC.

I believe that currently they are in the best position to look after the interests of the Club, players, staff, and fans.

chelseafc.com

Edited by useless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MachoFantastico said:

Sounds like it means nothing. Roman will still fund and technically own Chelsea he just won't be running the club. He's trying to distance himself from the club but will be interesting to see how the government feel about this. 

Yeah but its not that simple. He cant finance the club through his own wealth. This could be a massive problem for chelsea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, penguin said:

What does this mean exactly? He is still owns the club but has handed over control of it?

Yes, I think it's something and nothing. 

Just putting his ownership into the fridge till this blows over. 

Unless the Government sanction him personally.  He's not handed them the club, he's handed them stewardship of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, theboyangel said:

I imagine he has distanced himself from the club so if any sanctions are brought against him, it won’t immediately/directly affect Chelsea. 

Yeah that's what I think too

At our level he's put his business in his wife's name so that if anyone comes for his assets then strictly speaking it's not his, not sure if he's ever made money from the club or if it is all his other ventures by association which in theory won't stop

Maybe also very well thought out that he's passed it on to a charity rather than actually his wife, not sure what ruckus that would cause if they did come for it 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â