Roman ruins

This topic contains 42 replies, has 12 voices, and was last updated by chelsea1967 chelsea1967 5 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 43 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1643224
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Participant
    • :

    Any of the Chelsea lads getting a bit twitchy with the Abramovich stuff floating about? The Uk Government war on oligarchs (bet they’re all shitting themselves), him having to come in to the country through the backdoor and Israel, allegedly pulling the plug on the new ground etc.

    Not having a go, just be interested in your thoughts on it. All a storm in a teacup? Have you come on so far as to it not mattering if he did the offski*? I know there was a big push to be self sufficient and not need his money but have you got there yet?

    *sorry

    #1643261

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    Gas, Roman hasn’t been funding Chelsea for years now the club is self sufficient in keeping with FFP and if Roman leaves some other rich owner will come in that’s the way of the world now.

    Roman has been caught in the cross fire of the political situation between the UK and Russia but lots of club’s are managed by owners not resident in the UK and being an Israeli citizens Roman can pretty much come in and out of the UK as he wishes now and he can run Chelsea from wherever he may be albeit others already run the club on a day to day basis.

    In respect of the new ground the costs have escalated look what it’s now costing Spurs. The Chelsea team needs investing in and Arsenal are testimony to how difficult it is to do both.

    The current ground was only finished in the early 2000’s and a £billion investment in a new ground contributed another 18,000 fans every other week and match revenues aren’t the major contributor to club revenues anymore

    If Roman really wants out though driven by the political situation there will be someone somewhere that wants in, club’s the size and stature of Chelsea don’t become available very often.

    But we’re just fans and owners buy and dispose of club’s at their will and fans don’t have any say in any of it but if it all ends tomorrow as Chelsea fans we’ve had a hell of a ride. I never imagined Chelsea ever winning a League title let alone the Champions League but I’ve seen 5 League titles a Champions League and lots of other Cups too along the way so whatever happens from here thanks Roman for making dreams thought impossible come true.

    Personally I hope Roman sticks around he’s now more of a fan than an owner imo and few owners have outwardly demonstrated their support for their clubs like Roman has. Cheers 999

    #1643322
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Participant
    • :

    Cheers nine, good stuff. Similar thoughts to you about not being able to imagine the stuff we’ve won…I remember winning the Cup Winners Cup in 91 against Barcelona in Rotterdam and thinking that was that, life couldn’t get any better. The league? The European Cup? Pipe dreams.

    Anyway, an interesting read on the Chelsea situation, ta. The giddy United fans who have you down for becoming the next Portsmouth might have to wait a few decades.

    #1643326

    Kingo
    Participant
    • :

    There was a story that Abramovic tried to buy Pompey before he bought Chelsea but our chairman, Milan Mandaric wouldn’t sell to him because he didn’t trust him to look after the club properly. Then he sold to Sacha Gaydamak!!

    #1643330

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    Cheers Gas. I guess the majority of Chelsea fans me included will be disappointed with the news but it’s a difficult build and we would be out of the Bridge for 3/4 seasons and I can’t blame Roman for not wanting to invest a £ billion when the Government of the day won’t currently grant him a Visa to even enter the Country.

    #1643343
    notnice
    notnice
    Participant
    • :

    end of the day whatever transpires there will not be any shortage of billionaires interested in buying the club or for that matter any other EPL club, its already been determined that the football but mainly the EPL is the playground of billionaires and there are plenty around. Roman though would probably want to keep the club once all the relevant issues are sorted out.

    #1643509

    NOLU
    Participant
    • :

    I work in the financial industry an have to deal with regulations. The sanctions against Russia are very real. The UK Government are stepping up their interest in ‘dirty money’ and have made it clear that anyone wishing to obtain a visa must provide evidence of where their earning have come from – especially if they are applying from Russia. This is something Roman Abramovich is refusing to do. (I wonder why)
    Until he co-operates which looks unlikely at the moment he will not receive a Visa. On this basis I can see him selling up but due to the size of the current ground and the re-building challenges faced I don’t think there will be a long list of buyers. Certainly not with the wealth Chelsea have become accustomed to.
    I don’t think Abramovich would ever leave Chelsea in financial trouble but I can see him selling up and walking away.

    #1643535

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    Nolu, who knows but of all the owners Roman is more of a fan than an owner. Selling now wouldn’t impact on Chelsea because the club hasn’t had any investment outside of infrastructure from Abramovich for quite a while now due to the need to comply with FFP.

    Nothings changed with Roman and he’s been in the UK since 2003 now and he’s just been caught in the crossfire in the fall out between the UK and Russia and I suspect he thinks he’s been singled out because of his relationship with Putin.

    Given his Israeli citizenship Roman can come and go to the UK pretty much at will albeit he can’t work but the club can be managed remotely from Tel Aviv none of Joe Lewis, Stan Kroenke, John Henry or Sheikh Mansour reside in the UK to name but a few and function quite well.

    “But I think it’s eminently sellable as a club, based in west London. With TV rights increasing, if Manchester United is valued at over £3 billion I think Chelsea is valued at £1.5 billion – and very attractive.” Trevor Birch on Radio 4 today.

    There aren’t any Club’s that reside 10 minutes from Harrods are located in one of the most prestigious and valuable areas in the country are the most successful club in English football over the last 10 plus years, PL Champions in 2 of the last 4 seasons and cumulative Chamoions League and Europa League winners 5 years ago who are available tor purchase so I doubt Roman would struggle to find a buyer but I also doubt that’s his intention or that it will come to that. But I understand why opposition fans might see it differently.

    #1643559

    NOLU
    Participant
    • :

    999 you do raise some very good points. For the record, I am not talking as an opposition fan, more from a business perspective. (Not that I am any sort of business man) But – I am not so sure Chelsea is such as an attractive proposition as you think, I don’t think a football club has ever been bought on the basis they are 10 minutes from a posh department store.
    Your history in the Champions league would not carry much weight, especially now the rankings system has been scrapped and the fact you are no longer in it further hinders the attraction.

    It will come down to the ground and with the situation with the Pitch and the CPO (Chelsea Pitch Owners) would only complicate matters further.

    You don’t have a big ground in this current climate and increasing yours is a huge challenge. Stadium size is still going to be fundamental when it comes to FPP.

    Who knows what the future holds for TV revenue, especially now BT look like they may be taking a step back. The current TV deal is mouth-watering but financial analysts suggest without BT Sport pushing SKY next time up the deal after may not be so generous. Any potential buyer carrying out due diligence would be aware of this.

    With my complete unbiased hat on there are a few more attractive alternatives to Chelsea if you take away the emotion and are simply wearing a business hat. Newcastle, Aston Villa, Everton and even Leeds to name a few have more growth potential than Chelsea at present with much smaller investment required.

    With HS2 on its way and flights readily available to the capital from most places in the UK, London isn’t essential to be based anymore.

    I am not saying a buyer wouldn’t be found, I am just not sure a buyer would be so forthcoming with the wealth you maybe expecting and have been used to.

    Finally whilst Roman Abramovich has obtained a Israeli citizenship, movement is not free and he is restricted to 6 months at a time. He may not find this acceptable. Especially being forced to work remotely.

    #1643587
    Alfie07
    Alfie07
    Participant
    • :

    Abramovich pumped £34m into Chelsea in the 12 months to June 2017, so it’s not quite self-sufficient. Overall he is owed £1.1bn from the parent company of the club, which would be wiped out if he sold for £1.5bn. However, the new owner would also need to fund the £1bn stadium redevelopment, or decide to shelve that.

    A lack of CL revenue next season could also see Chelsea dip back into the black – as they would have done the last time they missed out on the CL had it not been for the sale of Oscar for £60m.

    I’m not saying things are bleak for Chelsea, far from it, but I am not convinced that it’s quite as rosey as some are making out either.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/21/is-roman-abramovich-rule-at-chelsea-fc-coming-to-an-end

    #1643603

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    Any money invested in Chelsea by Abramovich recently has been spent on infrastructure and Chelsea operate completely within FFP as owners can now only make a very minimal investment in their clubs outside of infrastructure within FFP and Chelsea no longer spend Roman’s money on transfers and haven’t for quite some time because if FFP.

    As Trevor Birch said in Radio 4 today “ I think it’s eminently sellable as a club, based in West London. With TV rights increasing, if Manchester United is valued at over £3 billion I think Chelsea is valued at £1.5 billion – and very attractive.”

    I’m not sure though it will come to that.

    Nolu the wealth we’ve been used to as I said hasn’t been forthcoming from Roman for some time , where Chelsea are located is highly valuable location in terms of property and land prices and the CPO seeded the right to build the ground to Roman and would do the same to any new owner and only exist to ensure that a property company doesn’t threaten home of the club as Marlef did all those years ago.

    I wouldn’t have a problem if Roman wanted to sell the club but putting on ice the plans for the new Stadium doesn’t mean that’s the case as this report from ESPN indicates “Chelsea have no concerns that owner Roman Abramovich will look to sell the club, sources have told ESPN FC.

    Chelsea’s decision to halt their proposed £1 billion redevelopment of Stamford Bridge on Thursday prompted fresh questions about Abramovich’s long-term commitment to the club, amid his increasingly public standoff with the UK government.

    Sources confirmed to ESPN FC that shelving the stadium project was Abramovich’s response to the issues he has faced in renewing his UK investor visa, despite the fact that he can legally visit the country after obtaining Israeli citizenship.

    The move, coupled with Chelsea’s delay in resolving Antonio Conte’s future and beginning their pursuit of summer transfer targets, created the impression for some of an owner withdrawing from the club he has invested more than £1bn in since taking over in 2003.

    But sources at the club told ESPN FC that there are no indications Abramovich would consider selling Chelsea in the near future, and insisted that he remains motivated by the desire to strengthen the squad after failing to finish in the top four and secure Champions League football this season.

    Abramovich has bankrolled a remarkable 15-year run that has brought 15 major trophies to Stamford Bridge, the most recent being Chelsea’s eighth FA Cup triumph that was secured with a 1-0 win over Manchester United at Wembley earlier this month.

    He has also ensured that Chelsea remain debt-free, though holding company Fordstam Ltd was listed in the club’s most recent accounts with £1.1bn of debt in the form of an interest-free loan from Abramovich, theoretically repayable on 18 months’ notice.

    It has been reported that the Russian billionaire would seek that money back if he ever decides to sell the club, though it is likely that the cost of repayment would be covered by any incoming owner.

    I realise all this gets one or two excited on here and many have predicted Roman moving on since 2003 but it’s not happened yet and should it happen and personally I don’t think it will then it would have had a much bigger impact in 2003 than it would do today and Roman unlike all of the other wealthy owners remains more of a fan than an owner and cares for the club.

    #1643608
    Alfie07
    Alfie07
    Participant
    • :

    No one is excited nine, no need for twisted knickers just yet.

    The fact that Abramovich put in £34m shows that Chelsea is not self sufficient. It does not matter what that money was spent on.

    #1643609

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    And to prove my point!😊

    #1643610

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    Chelsea FC plc have announced their annual financial results for the year ended 30 June 2017 with the club recording our highest ever turnover figure, resulting in a profit for the year of £15.3m.

    The group turnover figure grew to £361.3m from £329.1m in the previous year, an increase of 9.8 per cent. Broadcasting revenues increased as a result of winning the Premier League title last season, as well as the commencement of the Premier League’s latest contracts with TV broadcasters.

    Revenue from Chelsea’s commercial activity also grew following the signing of several partnership deals, most notably with new official training wear partner, Carabao.

    Stamford Bridge continued to sell out on matchdays and ticket prices remained frozen at 2011/12 levels. However, matchday revenues for 2016/17 fell slightly as a result of the club’s non-participation in UEFA competitions.

    Although the club recorded an operating loss in the year, the club reported an overall profit after making a profit on player trading of £69.2m.

    These results ensure the club continues to comply with UEFA’s break-even criteria under the Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations.

    Overall revenues are expected to continue to grow in 2017/18. These will be powered by the start of the club’s new technical partnership with Nike on 1 July 2017, the biggest commercial deal in the club’s history, and the team’s renewed participation in the UEFA Champions League.

    Chairman Bruce Buck said: ‘It is very pleasing we matched significant achievement on the pitch in 2016/17 with a successful year commercially. Our business has continued to grow long-term and to be able to post record turnover figures despite not playing Champions League football during that period highlights this strength.

    ‘Our fans played a major part, by supporting the team towards lifting the Premier League trophy, coming to our matches in large numbers, and our ever-increasing global fanbase has helped important commercial partnerships to be formed. We thank our supporters, partners and staff for a successful 2016/17.’

    Chelsea FC plc’s ultimate parent company, Fordstam Limited, which is also responsible for the Group’s non-footballing operations, reported a consolidated loss of £14.2m for the year largely due to new stadium planning costs and losses at non-football ancillary businesses.

    #1643611
    Alfie07
    Alfie07
    Participant
    • :

    I think your sensitivity makes you read things that aren’t being written.

    Abramovich put £34m into the club for the year ending June 2017 and the debt now stands at £1.1bn. All your smoke and mirrors will not change the facts.

    #1643613

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    Alfie, ha, ha, I’m heartbroken you won’t be responding to me anymore.😊

    But the analysis of Chelsea’s last financial results above suggest that Roman funded circa £14m in relation primarily to new Stadium costs. And I’m not disputing the £1.1 billion of debt indeed I made reference to it in my post above @ 5:35pm

    #1643614
    Alfie07
    Alfie07
    Participant
    • :

    Which would still make Chelsea not self sufficient. 😂😂😂

    #1643615
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Participant
    • :

    It doesn’t always fall on the 25th.

    #1643616

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    • :

    If you subtract £15.3m profit from £14.2m of Fordstam’s expenditure ie Roman as per the analysis of Chelsea’s last financial results above that still makes Chelsea self sufficient last fy by £1.1m .

    Clubs don’t fund Stadium development costs it’s all funded from outside sources often by borrowing and costs relating to the Stadium will disappear with the new Stadium plans currently on ice.

    #1643618
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Participant
    • :

    Be interesting to see what happened if Chelsea went up against United and City for a player again….like with Hazard. Could you still mix it with us cocky northern upstarts and our own I’ll gotten gains?

    And I could have sworn you mentioned Christmas. Am I hearing the voices again?

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 43 total)

You must be logged in to reply this topic.