Let's All Laugh At... Let's all laugh at Chelsea thread

[Nick-TopSpursMan]

When people talk about them landing on their feet, of course there is a chance that could happen.

But you have to look at the situation and weigh up the odds of that happening.

For them to operate as they do under Abramovich, they need either another state or state sponsored buyer to purchase them. These kind of buyers always buy clubs at very, very low prices ala Chelsea back in 03/04, City, Barcodes most recently. They then use their massive wealth to plough billions in to the club as a sports washing act. These types of owner don’t buy clubs for £1.5b plus and then also inject billions on top of that. It’s not how they operate.

So imo the only realistic scenario in which they get another owner like Abramovich is if they are sold off by the Government for miles below their market value, say £300-500m. This must be a possibility given everything is currently on the table.

But the likelihood of this imo is low as I would suggest the Government would have the club sold at market value. In which case they likely get a Glazer or ENIC or Kroenke type owner. This won’t ruin them completely but it will bring them down to the same level as us and Scum and it won’t be long before we overtake them comfortably as they simply lack the value in the club. Our stadium is far more lucrative for example and they will no longer have Roman pumping funds in to cover their losses as a result of huge overspending on transfers and wages.

Ironically if they go in to Administration, that could actually be their best shot at getting saved by a state sponsored type owner as their value will plummet. So we may not want that to happen.

 

[barry]

When people talk about them landing on their feet, of course there is a chance that could happen.

But you have to look at the situation and weigh up the odds of that happening.

For them to operate as they do under Abramovich, they need either another state or state sponsored buyer to purchase them. These kind of buyers always buy clubs at very, very low prices ala Chelsea back in 03/04, City, Barcodes most recently. They then use their massive wealth to plough billions in to the club as a sports washing act. These types of owner don’t buy clubs for £1.5b plus and then also inject billions on top of that. It’s not how they operate.

So imo the only realistic scenario in which they get another owner like Abramovich is if they are sold off by the Government for miles below their market value, say £300-500m. This must be a possibility given everything is currently on the table.

But the likelihood of this imo is low as I would suggest the Government would have the club sold at market value. In which case they likely get a Glazer or ENIC or Kroenke type owner. This won’t ruin them completely but it will bring them down to the same level as us and Scum and it won’t be long before we overtake them comfortably as they simply lack the value in the club. Our stadium is far more lucrative for example and they will no longer have Roman pumping funds in to cover their losses as a result of huge overspending on transfers and wages.

Ironically if they go in to Administration, that could actually be their best shot at getting saved by a state sponsored type owner as their value will plummet. So we may not want that to happen.

I actually think it'll be much harder, if not impossible, for States/Oligarchs to buy clubs in the future as the pushback after this will be immense. Maybe I'm dreaming.

 

[Nick-TopSpursMan]

I actually think it'll be much harder, if not impossible, for States/Oligarchs to buy clubs in the future as the pushback after this will be immense. Maybe I'm dreaming.

I share the same hope as you and I also have a feeling that the City and Newcastle owners will be sitting there feeling a little uncomfortable at the moment.

We have now seen what happens when you allow geo-politics to be mixed in to the very fabric of a football club.

With the complexity and insecurity in the Middle East, there’s absolutely a chance that a similar situation could arise for them one day.

In my opinion football should use this to hit the reset button and ban all state sponsored ownership in a very strict manner. This would immediately restore a great deal of fairness to football and cut off geo-politics from the game.

 

[whitesocks]

Before the freeze came in I expect the plan was to do another debt to equity conversion, something he's done previously.

Roman Abramovich turns £340m of debt into equity as Chelsea loss falls

Roman Abramovich has wiped off his outstanding loans to render Chelsea almost debt-free

www.theguardian.com

Also its hilarious to read that article from 2009 talking about the club aiming for self-sufficiency by 2010.

How did that work? He makes some of his shares available to buy and then buys them back himself for £500m?
This is as transparent as him buying a scarf from the club shop for £2bil. It is financially above board, but there are meant to be rules to stop owners injecting cash like this.

Also if a Tory donor, say, (Candy?), pays back the loan (for the government to hold), or that part that fell under ffp, then picks up the club for 50p, then that also is transparent, as the full worth of the club is measured in billions. Clearly the loan in this scenario would have been written off (plus the interest, which RA has been gifting over the years). And so the club needs to be hit hard - punishments lasting decades.

In 10 years time, when Russia are our mates again (probably less if china starts expanding), abramovich will return to the courts demanding his frozen assets back - maybe £4b + £2b loan. And he will probably win.
Whoever buys chelsea for a knock down price needs to indemnify the government from such a future claim.

 

[rossdapep]

Chelsea will land on their feet. They will get new owners. Win more cups and all will be the same.

I could be wrong but have they always fallen on their feet because of Abramovich? It's like Fergie at United, they'd always be calls for their demise and people use to say the same, that they'd land on their feet. Soon as Fergie left they fell.

Abramovich may have been the key

 

[slartibartfast]

I could be wrong but have they always fallen on their feet because of Abramovich? It's like Fergie at United, they'd always be calls for their demise and people use to say the same, that they'd land on their feet. Soon as Fergie left they fell.

Abramovich may have been the key

Money was the key. They're done. Best they can hope for is to stay competitive fighting for top 4.
I'd be amazed if anything different happens.

 

[riggi]

I could be wrong but have they always fallen on their feet because of Abramovich? It's like Fergie at United, they'd always be calls for their demise and people use to say the same, that they'd land on their feet. Soon as Fergie left they fell.

Abramovich may have been the key

There will be another one though.

United and Arsenal have been on the decline for donkeys and still bring in cups.

I’ll believe this Chelsea demise when I see it.

 

[tony0379]

“I need you to send me $30,000. My enemies are freezing my bank accounts.”

 

[nailsy]

Hugely surprised to see Fat Frank distance himself from Roman here. . .

Isn't that just because RA wasn't allowed in the country due to his visa issues? I doubt it's because Lampard severed ties with him.

 

[Spursberg]

The VAT man will be knocking on their door any day.

I am convinced that Roman won't sell the club and write off £2bn..........he'd be a fucking idiot if he did! Besides which, I'm pretty sure he'll have more important things on his mind right now.

Correction, PUTIN will not allow it. If it is the only option for Roman to rid the debt and have the UK govenment oversee funds are given to Ukraine, he will demand that he just lose the money and let Chelsea go bust. Roman does not decide this, it is why he is in this situation in the first place. He is a Putin puppet.

 

[Serpico]

When people talk about them landing on their feet, of course there is a chance that could happen.

But you have to look at the situation and weigh up the odds of that happening.

For them to operate as they do under Abramovich, they need either another state or state sponsored buyer to purchase them. These kind of buyers always buy clubs at very, very low prices ala Chelsea back in 03/04, City, Barcodes most recently. They then use their massive wealth to plough billions in to the club as a sports washing act. These types of owner don’t buy clubs for £1.5b plus and then also inject billions on top of that. It’s not how they operate.

So imo the only realistic scenario in which they get another owner like Abramovich is if they are sold off by the Government for miles below their market value, say £300-500m. This must be a possibility given everything is currently on the table.

But the likelihood of this imo is low as I would suggest the Government would have the club sold at market value. In which case they likely get a Glazer or ENIC or Kroenke type owner. This won’t ruin them completely but it will bring them down to the same level as us and Scum and it won’t be long before we overtake them comfortably as they simply lack the value in the club. Our stadium is far more lucrative for example and they will no longer have Roman pumping funds in to cover their losses as a result of huge overspending on transfers and wages.

Ironically if they go in to Administration, that could actually be their best shot at getting saved by a state sponsored type owner as their value will plummet. So we may not want that to happen.

Will they get points deducted if they go into administration or better relegated?

 

[dovahkiin]

Exclusive: Chelsea stars plot escape by contacting lawyers over tearing up contracts

Plus, a Q&A on what happens next for Chelsea as they scramble to keep the club afloat

www.telegraph.co.uk

Exclusive: Chelsea stars plot escape by contacting lawyers over tearing up contracts​

Plus, a Q&A on what happens next for Chelsea as they scramble to keep the club afloat
By Tom Morgan, Sports News Correspondent 11 March 2022 • 8:17pm
Chelsea players are exploring potential escape routes should financial armageddon hit the club as a result of the sanctions facing Roman Abramovich. Agents have been in contact with lawyers to ask about their options if, under a worst-case-scenario, salary payments are late in the coming months.
A host of Chelsea's rivals are known to be circling should the club start running into serious financial difficulties, which analysts believe is possible if takeover attempts stall. Unless Abramovich has quietly funnelled cash into the club since the Ukraine crisis erupted, executives could soon struggle to cover the £28million of salary outgoings a month. Cash reserves will do little to help as there was only £17milllion in the club's parent company during the last set of accounts.
Lawyers confirmed to Telegraph Sport, on condition of confidence, that they have heard from concerned agents requesting clarity over their players' employment rights. One legal source said players might have to go unpaid for two months to have "clear just cause" - with a representative then giving a 15 day notice period to terminate their contract. However, given the aggravating circumstances of Abramovich being sanctioned, a court might find in favour of a player if he or she were to walk away at an earlier stage. There has been a sense of unity amongst Thomas Tuchel and his playing squad in recent weeks, but representatives have told lawyers they need to be aware of options if the club descends into financial paralysis.
Chelsea's immediate financial outlook remains shrouded in confusion following 24 hours in which the club was forced to give up financial support from Abramovich, along with matchday income and prize money. Securing a bank loan already appears highly problematic, with credit cards linked to the club’s corporate accounts with Barclaycard now under temporary restrictions as banks react to the sanctions.
Under the current licence that allows the club to operate while Abramovich’s assets are frozen, The Telegraph understands Chelsea would not be able to pay for enough security, stewarding and catering to keep all sections of Stamford Bridge open. Chelsea do not believe they would be able to complete the season under the current terms of the licence which they are hopeful will be reviewed in the coming days.
Nike, which has nine years remaining on its £60m-per-year deal, has yet to state whether it will continue to support the club after Three, the club’s main shirt sponsor, chose to suspend its partnership. There is growing hope within the club that the American kit brand will stand by them after Trivago announced on Friday that it would maintain its £10m a year agreement.
Sources close to talks between Government and Chelsea insist ministers would be certain to help fast-track any takeover if the buying candidate was deemed fit and proper. There is also a willingness to tweak the current licence to ensure they can continue fulfilling fixtures. The Treasury and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport remain locked in talks with the club.

---

Counting the cost: What now for troubled west London club?​

By Tom Morgan
Until 9am on Thursday, Roman Abramovich was in a race against time to sell the club. Now, with his assets frozen, Chelsea are instead scrambling to buy time to keep the club afloat. Telegraph Sport explores where the club goes from here:

Chelsea were already a loss-making entity prior to this – how bad does it get now?​

There was just over £17 million in cash reserves in Chelsea's parent company during the last set of accounts up to the end of last season. It's likely that figure remains at a similar level today, given it has remained broadly the same in recent years. Unless Abramovich has quietly funnelled cash into the club since the Ukraine crisis erupted, Chelsea will be reliant on other sources immediately to cover a month of wages at the club – which are now estimated at £28m.
With the drawbridge lifting on almost all other commercial revenue, executives were quickly on the phone to the Government on Tuesday to say the current sanction licence could send them bust. The theoretical knife-edge risk that the club now faces is largely due to the financial eco-system that Abramovich has created for Chelsea. The loans that he has pumped in since buying the club in 2003 now stand at £1.5 billion. He had promised to write off the debt after putting the club up for sale last week, with proceeds going to "all victims of the Ukraine war", but he may be feeling less inclined to be the good guy now the Government has turned on him.
The loss of match-day revenue is not as bruising as it might have been, given the club is already dwarfed by some rivals in potential earnings due to his decision in 2018 to shelve a £1bn stadium redevelopment. Instead it is the club's overwhelming reliance on Abramovich which now has to change.
Last season alone, Abramovich injected around £150m and withdrew around £130m to end the year loaning the club an overall £19.9m. The loans are due to be repaid to Camberley International Investments Ltd, a British Virgin Island entity. "What this means is that there will always be some months where Chelsea doesn't have cash itself to pay the wage bill," says Kieran Maguire, a lecturer in football finance at Liverpool University. "He lends the club the money and then, when the next instalment comes in – either from either transfers, or the Premier League – the club then uses that to repay Abramovich. The club has effectively used him as a glorified payday loan company. In 2020, he lent a net £200m – it's crazy numbers." The debt involving Abramovich is not an immediate issue, however. As the loans are from the owner himself and interest free, Chelsea can refer to themselves as effectively debt free.

Is there a short-term fix to stop the club falling into administration?​

Given the freeze on match-day and commercial income, Chelsea may need to look to fast-track income that was already due to be coming their way by the end of the season. This year's forecasted accounts were looking comparatively rosy compared with some previous years, given healthy profits were expected on player sales.
Chelsea's parent account, Fordstam, details how 13 players were sold for £103.7m. Instalments will be due on those deals at the end of the current season. Maguire, an accountant who previously worked in insolvency, told Telegraph Sport that Chelsea might also explore the possibility of bringing their TV payments due from the Premier League and Uefa forward. "The last thing the Premier League wants is a car crash," he adds. "The same can be said of the Government. So what the Premier League could do to help calm troubled waters is to advance some of that money which was due towards the end of the season now, which would allow Chelsea to pay the next wage bill." Another possibility for executives to secure a bank loan – although that is complicated by Chelsea now being a frozen asset.

What is the likely conclusion to all this?​

The Government says it is "open to a sale" and has told Abramovich he could come to ministers with a potential buyer and then request a new licence to allow a takeover to go through. The Premier League, meanwhile, has spoken in recent weeks of its directors' and owners' tests being completed in a matter of days is necessary. Maguire suggests a takeover could still be possible in April if 'everyone swims in the same direction'.
"What we're trying to do here is to manage cash and buy time – that's what I used to do in the insolvency world. You're robbing Peter to pay Paul. You're trying to buy time to allow the business to continue. Whilst Chelsea is not in administration, and I don't think that will be the case, the ideal scenario will be a sale at the end of April."

How much will a potential exodus of sponsors hurt?​

Three, one of their main commercial partners, sparked panic at the club by suspending its £40m a year deal on Thursday, and Plan International, one of Chelsea's charity partners, has also withdrawn support.. Other sponsors, including delivery app Zapp and car manufacturer Hyundai, said that they were reviewing their deals, as analysts warned that commercial partners would be "wary of guilt by association". Conrad Wiacek, head of sport analysis at analytics firm GlobalData, said the Government's sanctions on Abramovich had "cast a shadow" over Chelsea's numerous and lucrative commercial agreements. "While Chelsea has a sporting licence to continue trading as a soccer club, many brands will be wary of guilt by association," Wiacek said.
However, with Trivago announcing on Friday that it would stand by its £10m a year agreement, the club is privately hopeful that Nike, which has declined to comment, will maintain its £60m per season agreement
Commercial revenues of £153.6m were already down from £170.4m in the previous year due to the impact of the pandemic. The major concern for the club around sponsorship is the potential impact mass departures would have on the value of any takeover.

Will staff be laid off?​

The pandemic showed how clubs start sacking the lowest paid members of staff first as they look to cut costs. There are huge doubts already for the workers in the club shops, hotels and car park. Pat Nevin, the former Chelsea player, was quoted telling BBC5 Live that "staff have been partially laid off already".
It seems unthinkable that Chelsea will start laying off players and coaches, but the prospect of the Government being asked to furlough staff surplus to requirements under the terms of the licence has been raised.
Gregory Ioannidis, a leading sports lawyer, told Telegraph Sport that salary support from the Treasury would be a hard sell, however. "We would have to think what the reaction from the public would be or other sectors of the economy," he said. "This may just create a hot potato and I don't think they want it now, especially with National Insurance increases."

 

[Gb160]

There will be another one though.

United and Arsenal have been on the decline for donkeys and still bring in cups.

I’ll believe this Chelsea demise when I see it.

I’ll believe they’ll win the owner lottery twice when I see it mate.

The pool of sugar daddy owners who can realistically buy them and continue like Roman did is tiny.
The pool of investors who can buy them, saddle them with debt, and run them like Utd/Arsenal is much bigger.

Chances are they’ll end up run more like Utd/Arsenal than how they were before, which can only be a good thing for us.

 

[slartibartfast]

Chelsea to stay afloat like a turd that just won't flush

 

[thebenjamin]

?????

 

[riggi]

I’ll believe they’ll win the owner lottery twice when I see it mate.

The pool of sugar daddy owners who can realistically buy them and continue like Roman did is tiny.
The pool of investors who can buy them, saddle them with debt, and run them like Utd/Arsenal is much bigger.

Chances are they’ll end up run more like Utd/Arsenal than how they were before, which can only be a good thing for us.

Yeah they won’t get another owner like him but I certainly don’t see them nosediving over the next few years.

 

[Gb160]

Yeah they won’t get another owner like him but I certainly don’t see them nosediving over the next few years.

Although that would be great, it’s pretty unlikely.

 

[riggi]

Although that would be great, it’s pretty unlikely.

Im a pessimistic bastard and I can only see them being more successful than us for years to come.

 

[Gb160]

Im a pessimistic bastard and I can only see them being more successful than us for years to come.

That’s not exactly a high bar mate.

 

[BosSpurs08]

Looking at the known facts it seems like the most likely outcome is a quick sale to a Kroenke/Glazer type, and that they'll sadly land on their feet (in our view) but in a diminished form where they'll have to run as an entity with real-world finances (like us).

However...the last few weeks have been an instructive lesson in tail risk, both within the sport as well as in foreign affairs - and given the time constraints, I find it easier to imagine a scenario where things spiral out of control for them (especially if RA doesn't play ball) than one where they (quickly) find a bidder capable of maintaining the current levels of financial doping.

My take on Chelsea being sold......As The war in Ukraine intensifies, Chelsea FC becomes so toxic because of its association to the current Putin regime. Who would want to take it on. It's great success over the past 20 years and its rise to super club status will always be attributed to the Abramovich ill gotten gains. Regarding sponsorship, would you want a football club that will always be associated to the slaughter of innocent woman & children, I know thats sounds harsh, but the moment the government sanctioned Abramovich, its value diminished. RANT OVER.

This made me think a little bit. I have no pity for Chelsea supporters. Dance with the devil etc. etc. However powerless they are regarding the circumstances of their ownership, they have every opportunity to dictate how their club is perceived in the post-Abromovich era. From what we can observe so far, from singing his name to their conduct online/in media, they're failing the test.

I would (begrudgingly) have more respect for them if the general attitude was, "yup - we won a bunch, but Uncle Roman was a bad apple. We'll take our lumps and move on." But they're playing to part, so fuck 'em.

Lastly, look at what this dirty money has done to them, or the morons wearing Saudi garb in the north. All sense of morals and ethics gone out the window. As others have mentioned, RA has been one of Putin's top enablers going back to the '90s, and the entire time Chelsea has been under his watch, Russia has experienced world-historical levels of wealth stolen from citizens, the "disappearance" of journalists/activists/political rivals (in Russia, but also allegedly within UK borders), and now wars of expansion against neighboring democracies.

Laughing at Chelsea's potential demise, but we need to remember this when we eventually get sold....