Chelsea

[NurembergVillan]

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

The government however won't care about the value of the asset; to them the cheaper the better, especially if it's someone well-connected who is favourite to buy it. 

Deadline Day would be absolutely AMAZING!

[Panto_Villan]

25 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

They're not particularly focused on the type of asset it is, I suppose. If it was a house, you wouldn't just confiscate it off him and sell it and take the proceeds or give it to someone more favoured, because that sort of thing has a really bad track record. The problem is it's easy to put a house on ice for a while as the politics happens elsewhere, but not possible to do that to a football club. The government however won't care about the value of the asset; to them the cheaper the better, especially if it's someone well-connected who is favourite to buy it. 

Yeah, but ultimately Chelsea is a business that employs people rather than a piece of property like a house or a yacht. I guess that's what I was clumsily trying to say in my previous post. If Abramovich owned a major factory or bank the government wouldn't just shutter it and put everyone out of work, you'd assume that they'd ensure it continued to operate, right? Likely by transferring it to new ownership.

While I wouldn't put anything past the current government in terms of cronyism I think there are good reasons why they'd want to maximise the value of the asset. Firstly, the UK can't really be seen to just hand a major asset over to a politically-connected insider at a knockdown price. The rule of (business) law is pretty fundamental to our economic environment; arbitrarily nationalising foreign-owned companies / property is one of the fastest ways to undermine that. Auctioning it off would seem far more legitimate imo.

To be honest I think there's a good chance Russia will be nationalising foreign businesses and some major UK firms are likely to get hit by that (e.g. BP). If there's tit-for-tat behaviour there I wouldn't be surprised if the UK government ends up pocketing the sale proceeds from Chelsea, so they probably want to ensure they get a decent price for it!

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

They're not particularly focused on the type of asset it is, I suppose. If it was a house, you wouldn't just confiscate it off him and sell it and take the proceeds or give it to someone more favoured, because that sort of thing has a really bad track record. The problem is it's easy to put a house on ice for a while as the politics happens elsewhere, but not possible to do that to a football club. The government however won't care about the value of the asset; to them the cheaper the better, especially if it's someone well-connected who is favourite to buy it. 

That works fine with the football club asset - but not so well with the debt asset.

Roman has two assets here - one is Chelsea and it's worth about £1.5bn to him and the other is an outstanding loan he made to Chelsea, which is also worth about £1.5bn to him should he decide to call it in.

I can sort of figure out how things work with the physical asset - but how sanctions and asset freezes deal with the debt is a mystery to me.

 

[YLN]

I am very doubtful about Roman's plans to give the proceeds of his sale to charity, and even about the loss he has made on the loans to Chelsea. 

First on the proceeds going to victim charities. The charity could be an Abramovich involved non-profit, that he is on the board of directors of, potentially receiving an income. He can use this charitable donation to write off some taxable income. He probably has some very creative accountants who will be putting this charitable donation through a few taxable incomes internationally. Also the charity will be Putin approved. There's no doubt on that. 

On the point of writing off the loan given to Chelsea. This will also be very tasty for his accountants, and they will run this loss through some profits, which will absolutely reduce any tax burden associated on past and future profits of some of his other business interests. 

That would be my understanding of how this all would work. Roman is not writing off the value of his business for the good of his beloved Chelsea fans and to support the relief effort to the occupied Ukrainians, no matter how much chanting those racist idiots do of his name

[Demitri_C]

20 hours ago, KAZZAM said:

Without doubt the start of the decline of Chelsea football club. 

Roman won't be subsidising them anymore and that will hurt big time. They will end up declining like Arsenal. 

Great news i absolutely cant wait

[brummybloke]

Their wage bill is supposedly $150 million.

And that's just for the 1st team squad.

I guess they won't be shown on tv now as that generates extra income ?

So no new money allowed in so no point selling players, they will have to loan them for no fees and hope another club pays their full salary for 6 months at a time if this carries on into next season.

No new sponsors and sponsors pulling out.

Takes me back to the Ken bates days of writing to each pool's winner begging for money for the club.

 

[maqroll]

So...if RA is blocked from selling, they're just in purgatory. No new buyer, but no new signings, contracts, or planning ahead. Surely something has to give? 

Or are they allowed to just collapse?

[HanoiVillan]

27 minutes ago, brummybloke said:

I guess they won't be shown on tv now as that generates extra income ?

Current contracts seem to be being honoured, so I imagine they will be on TV until 30th May and then it will depend on the new exemptions and the situation at that time.

3 minutes ago, maqroll said:

So...if RA is blocked from selling, they're just in purgatory. No new buyer, but no new signings, contracts, or planning ahead. Surely something has to give? 

Or are they allowed to just collapse?

Abramovic is being encouraged to sell it, it's just that he won't receive the proceeds.

[Demitri_C]

I cant remember who said it but the person who claimed candy might get it i think that is the more logical choice. 

Probably the best person for us as he wont have alot of interest in putting huge money into chelsea but more making a profit for himself like the party he donates to

Edited March 11, 2022 by Demitri_C

[Follyfoot]

1 hour ago, brummybloke said:

Their wage bill is supposedly $150 million.

And that's just for the 1st team squad.

I guess they won't be shown on tv now as that generates extra income ?

So no new money allowed in so no point selling players, they will have to loan them for no fees and hope another club pays their full salary for 6 months at a time if this carries on into next season.

No new sponsors and sponsors pulling out.

Takes me back to the Ken bates days of writing to each pool's winner begging for money for the club.

 

To build his moat around the pitch

[mikeyp102]

I wonder how long the sanctions will be on for. It’s a really weird situation. Aren't they allowed the season ticket holders but not sell any more tickets, including away which means they then have a 100% home attendance, giving them an advantage?

[Xela]

Chelsea's bank accounts suspended! 

[theboyangel]

3 hours ago, Xela said:

Chelsea's bank accounts suspended! 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2022 by theboyangel

[Sam-AVFC]

I really hope it's true that Nick Candy is a preferred bidder. He'd be an absolute disaster.

[trekka]

1 minute ago, Xela said:

Chelsea's bank accounts suspended! 

Ha! I was mid-way through writing a post about this when I saw the notification pop-up.  The club says they hope the suspension will be "lifted shortly" but I can't see it happening - this is the bank account of Chelsea FC and Chelsea FC is owned by Abramovich.  They would be breaking the law if they are shown to be doing business with the club.  

[Sam-AVFC]

16 minutes ago, trekka said:

Ha! I was mid-way through writing a post about this when I saw the notification pop-up.  The club says they hope the suspension will be "lifted shortly" but I can't see it happening - this is the bank account of Chelsea FC and Chelsea FC is owned by Abramovich.  They would be breaking the law if they are shown to be doing business with the club.  

This is wishful thinking. I saw a few headlines and they all said it was temporary in the headline. Likely making sure they will be complying by the rules the government are setting out.

The government know how many people it would turn off voting for them ever again if they let Chelsea go bust while their golden generation walk away for free. 

Roman Abramovich is the only one who could screw them long term if he doesn't like what the government propose about the proceeds and drags it through the courts.

[sidcow]

I don't understand what's going on really. 

His assets are not confiscated, they are just frozen.  He could theoretically get them back soon if Russia cleans its nose and sanctions are lifted. 

So surely they are not supposed to harm the asset.  I don't understand not selling tickets and merchandise, as long as the money stays with Chelsea and Abramovich can't enjoy those proceeds.  That's all legitimate business that all Premier League clubs are involved in. 

It's all very odd, I think this is just the knee jerk decision and the rules will be refined.  Especially if they can't even pay the players. 

If it does get to that stage I presume the players can be released from their contracts.  Are clubs allowed to sign free agents at any time through the year or will they have to wait till the summer before they can sign for new clubs? 

The other side to this is rather like us when we were broke is they'll probably right now be laying off tea ladies and many others from  army of staff who support a big Premier League club.  That would be incredibly unfair on those people. 

Edited March 11, 2022 by sidcow

[The Fun Factory]

2 hours ago, maqroll said:

So...if RA is blocked from selling, they're just in purgatory. No new buyer, but no new signings, contracts, or planning ahead. Surely something has to give? 

Or are they allowed to just collapse?

There are too many Tories to let that happen

I still remember David toe sucking Mellor doing 606.

The horror.

[brummybloke]

12 minutes ago, sidcow said:

I don't understand what's going on really. 

His assets are not confiscated, they are just frozen.  He could theoretically get them back soon if Russia cleans its nose and sanctions are lifted. 

So surely they are not supposed to harm the asset.  I don't understand not selling tickets and merchandise, as long as the money stays with Chelsea and Abramovich can't enjoy those proceeds.  That's all legitimate business that all Premier League clubs are involved in. 

It's all very odd, I think this is just the knee jerk decision and the rules will be refined.  Especially if they can't even pay the players. 

If it does get to that stage I presume the players can be released from their contracts.  Are clubs allowed to sign free agents at any time through the year or will they have to wait till the summer before they can sign for new clubs? 

The other side to this is rather like us when we were broke is they'll probably right now be laying off tea ladies and many others from  army of staff who support a big Premier League club.  That would be incredibly unfair on those people. 

They are able to pay players and staff. That's pretty much it. Only tickets purchased before sanctions are valid so no tickets for home or away only tickets pre purchased before yesterday.

Their premier league money is 150 million that probs just about covers wages, not running costs of ground, training facilities or non bus travel to matches.

The club is a financial asset ( at the moment) so everything has been frozen so no new sponsors, no transfers in or out for money and I presume just now the basic sky TV money as if they get picked to play on tv it generates more additional money after the sanctions which they are not allowed to do. 

Cup competition prize money ? Hmm, could that be refused if they won a cup ? 

Come summer time if still in limbo they will have to loan out half their biggest earners for free in the hope wage bill comes down to allow them to still have a club.

 

Mind you, it could all  change in a day and they could be allowed to be sold and the money goes to the treasury to guarantee it doesn't go to ruski !! 

[PaulC]

 

19 minutes ago, sidcow said:

I don't understand what's going on really. 

His assets are not confiscated, they are just frozen.  He could theoretically get them back soon if Russia cleans its nose and sanctions are lifted. 

So surely they are not supposed to harm the asset.  I don't understand not selling tickets and merchandise, as long as the money stays with Chelsea and Abramovich can't enjoy those proceeds.  That's all legitimate business that all Premier League clubs are involved in. 

It's all very odd, I think this is just the knee jerk decision and the rules will be refined.  Especially if they can't even pay the players. 

If it does get to that stage I presume the players can be released from their contracts.  Are clubs allowed to sign free agents at any time through the year or will they have to wait till the summer before they can sign for new clubs? 

The other side to this is rather like us when we were broke is they'll probably right now be laying off tea ladies and many others from  army of staff who support a big Premier League club.  That would be incredibly unfair on those people. 

We have never had  a situation like this before though have we.