OutByEaster? Posted February 26, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2022 I think that's probably a good sign for Chelsea and their supporters - he's realised that in order to best serve the club he needs to distance himself from it and so he's done that, or at least tried to. I think this is something that benefits Chelsea more than Abramovich, although I'm sure he's hoping it'll help reduce the pressure on govt to separate him from his asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 26, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2022 5 minutes ago, villa4europe said: 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 I think there's a little of this, but it's not what he's done - he's still owner, he hasn't passed on the asset, or for that matter any sort of obvious control - he still owns and can fund Chelsea, his CEO will still be running the club and making the decisions behind the scenes on all the football stuff - it'll be very interesting to find out what "stewardship" actually means from a legal perspective or indeed if it means anything at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 I wonder who is gonna make the decision on Lukaku now? it seems the best thing for the club. Although I don't know whether to big him up on this, or if it means he is just running from the shit that may come his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 4 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I think there's a little of this, but it's not what he's done - he's still owner, he hasn't passed on the asset, or for that matter any sort of obvious control - he still owns and can fund Chelsea, his CEO will still be running the club and making the decisions behind the scenes on all the football stuff - it'll be very interesting to find out what "stewardship" actually means from a legal perspective or indeed if it means anything at all. His assets have been frozen and he isn’t allowed to reside in the UK under the current sanctions. Not sure he can be writing cheques for Chelsea currently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 26, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted February 26, 2022 1 minute ago, kidlewis said: His assets have been frozen and he isn’t allowed to reside in the UK under the current sanctions. Not sure he can be writing cheques for Chelsea currently I don't think so? He's not had any sanctions yet, though they may follow of course. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 42 minutes ago, theboyangel said: I never knew @useless had been in charge of Chelsea for the last 20yrs… I believe he has a 50/50 share. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 26, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2022 5 minutes ago, kidlewis said: His assets have been frozen and he isn’t allowed to reside in the UK under the current sanctions. Not sure he can be writing cheques for Chelsea currently Apparently he can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 26, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2022 7 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: I wonder who is gonna make the decision on Lukaku now? The CEO. He's still the owner, the CEO is still the CEO. Stewardship is a very strange word - it might mean that they have the ability to start a search for a new owner. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post StewieGriffin Posted February 26, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted February 26, 2022 Shuddered at the use of the word "custodian" 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted February 26, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted February 26, 2022 42 minutes ago, StewieGriffin said: Shuddered at the use of the word "custodian" I was romantically nourished by it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: Apparently he can. From what I’ve read he absolutely cannot be in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 26, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2022 9 minutes ago, kidlewis said: From what I’ve read he absolutely cannot be in the UK. There's some talk about immigration officials being told not to let him into the UK which is unconfirmed, but to be honest, it's pretty clear that he wouldn't want to be here right now anyway - he'll want to keep himself somewhere where he's not open to arrest. I meant he can still invest in Chelsea - right now there's nothing to stop him doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 2 hours ago, StewieGriffin said: Shuddered at the use of the word "custodian" It's a very odd statement. There's no way he can continue as owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted February 26, 2022 Share Posted February 26, 2022 7 minutes ago, The_Steve said: It's a very odd statement. There's no way he can continue as owner. He literally is continuing as owner. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted February 26, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted February 26, 2022 1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said: He literally is continuing as owner. Yep. I’m not sure why there’s so much conjecture about all this. He’s installed a puppet regime to front things but will still be pulling the strings from a distance. I wonder where he got the idea from? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted February 27, 2022 Share Posted February 27, 2022 5 hours ago, sidcow said: 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. Not so sure. I think it's the beginning of the end for him. That announcement doesn't mean much in itself - but I think he will either scale back or end his ownship in due course. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted February 27, 2022 Share Posted February 27, 2022 Said before Chelsea are in a good spot, if they stopped Abramovich 10/15 years ago it might have made an impact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted February 27, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted February 27, 2022 How many times does he use the word “I” in a short statement about a famous old English football club? It’s always, always, about him. “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.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 27, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 27, 2022 12 hours ago, Zatman said: Said before Chelsea are in a good spot, if they stopped Abramovich 10/15 years ago it might have made an impact How do you make it a good spot? If he is forced out or decides to leave, their existence will rely almost entirely on whether or not he feels like calling in the debt on the money they owe him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted February 27, 2022 Moderator Share Posted February 27, 2022 Interesting that the Chelsea charity trustees have not agreed to take stewardship of the club. If they refuse or find a way in which they're not legally able to take control of the club, then Roman is back to square one, the asset is at risk and Chelsea's future is up in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts