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

[Trotter]

Thanks to the experts we had here earlier, but at the risk of appearing to be a total idiott, why do the likes of man city dope their club via sponsorship and get in trouble, when they could legitimately just loan the club £150m every year then write it off the next, or convert it into shares?

They can loan the club 150m, that is not an issue. Loaning money is purely cash flow (balance sheet), and can come in formats such as loan, equity increase etc. there is no difference per se to owners lending money to their own company rather than a bank lending money.(although one usually comes interest free, the other doesn’t). That does not get them round FFP though.
FFP does(well did as it is not really a thing now since COVID) not deal with balance sheet, but P&L. Man City overstate “inter company” sponsorship to increase their profit/reduce their loss to try and stay within FFP,l (the greater their income, the more costs they can spend) Chelsea have never needed to do that, they have always met FFP without the need for any dodgy accounting practices. What Man City have done is deliberately try and find a way around FFP and to all intents and purposes succeeded, not necessarily because they were clever, more because it took so long for case to be filed against them, Chelsea haven’t needed to resort to those means

 

[slartibartfast]

I’d been burying my head in the sand regarding them falling on their feet but it’s going to fucking happen isn’t it ffs?!?!

Pun intended?

 

[davidmatzdorf]

"Supporters" have been replaced by "fans"

It is often worth reminding oneself that the word "fans" originated as an abbreviation of "fanatics".

 

[slartibartfast]

Ahh that made me laugh ?

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

It is often worth reminding oneself that the word "fans" originated as an abbreviation of "fanatics".

OK, sorry.

In that case, it's a shame they're fanatical about looking for any reason to moan, abuse and speak down to people.

 

[Stuart Leathercock]

They can loan the club 150m, that is not an issue. Loaning money is purely cash flow (balance sheet), and can come in formats such as loan, equity increase etc. there is no difference per se to owners lending money to their own company rather than a bank lending money.(although one usually comes interest free, the other doesn’t). That does not get them round FFP though.
FFP does(well did as it is not really a thing now since COVID) not deal with balance sheet, but P&L. Man City overstate “inter company” sponsorship to increase their profit/reduce their loss to try and stay within FFP,l (the greater their income, the more costs they can spend) Chelsea have never needed to do that, they have always met FFP without the need for any dodgy accounting practices. What Man City have done is deliberately try and find a way around FFP and to all intents and purposes succeeded, not necessarily because they were clever, more because it took so long for case to be filed against them, Chelsea haven’t needed to resort to those means

FFP is still in place it was just altered for Covid in the following way:

Break-even rule – valid during seasons 2020/21 and 2021/22

• the assessment of financial year 2020 is postponed for one season, and will be assessed together with the financial year 2021;

• the 2020/2021 monitoring period is curtailed and only covers two reporting periods (financial years ending in 2018 and 2019);

• the 2021/2022 monitoring period is extended and covers four reporting periods (financial years ending in 2018-2019-2020 and 2021).

• the financial years 2020 and 2021 are assessed as one single period;

• the adverse impact of the pandemic is neutralised by averaging the combined deficit of 2020 and 2021 and by further allowing specific COVID-19 adjustments.

The above being said UEFA are reviewing FFP at present and there are rumours they may scrap the break even elements and instead look to try to instead put in place limits on transfer fees and wages (not sure how they would do that - perhaps as a percentage of turnover)?

 

[Trotter]

FFP is still in place it was just altered for Covid in the following way:

Break-even rule – valid during seasons 2020/21 and 2021/22

• the assessment of financial year 2020 is postponed for one season, and will be assessed together with the financial year 2021;

• the 2020/2021 monitoring period is curtailed and only covers two reporting periods (financial years ending in 2018 and 2019);

• the 2021/2022 monitoring period is extended and covers four reporting periods (financial years ending in 2018-2019-2020 and 2021).

• the financial years 2020 and 2021 are assessed as one single period;

• the adverse impact of the pandemic is neutralised by averaging the combined deficit of 2020 and 2021 and by further allowing specific COVID-19 adjustments.

The above being said UEFA are reviewing FFP at present and there are rumours they may scrap the break even elements and instead look to try to instead put in place limits on transfer fees and wages (not sure how they would do that - perhaps as a percentage of turnover)?

What UEFA are talking about is clubs being able to spend 70% of revenue on salaries with no penalty and play in their competitions.
However clubs will still be able to spend what they want on salaries, but have to pay what in US Sports terms is a luxury tax to UEFA on a percentage of anything above 70% and that would get shared out amongst the clubs in its competitions.
As now Premier League would likely have their own FFP rules, which still allows clubs significantly greater losses/flexibility than UEFA do.

so UEFA will go from an unenforceable so therefore no solution currently due to COVID adjustments, to a solution which technically means clubs with bottomless pockets could spend what they want on salaries and just be fined.

 

[shelfboy68]

I think Chelsea will come out of this smelling of roses unfortunately even though we would like to see them drift down the table sadly it won't happen.
Yes RA and his association and links to Putin and Russia may have temporarily caused a stain on the club but someone will buy them and soon it will get forgotten.
Although they have not got their new stadium built yet which must be difficult and expensive in that part of London compared to the crime ridden shit hole that Tottenham area is.
Their success over the past 20 years and the huge global fanbase that the stockpiling of trophies during that period will still make them hugely attractive to an individual or a corporation who will continue where they left off.

 

[rossdapep]

How can they not allow it considering what has been allowed at Newcastle and Sheffield United?

Well, on one hand you can certainly argue that it's not fair to deny others when others have had it accepted.

However, does that mean we have to allow these criminals into the game forever? It's a bit like a team benefitting from a crap rule in the game only for the rules to change and another not receive the benefits.

Draw a line. Unfortunately we let some in but that's it now.

What if in 10 years time we have a number of Saudis involved and the world decides to sanction them?

There is a lesson here and an opportunity to really set a precedent. Protect the game.

I couldn't give 2 shits whether it's unfair on others, it's ruining the game.

 

[Trotter]

I think Chelsea will come out of this smelling of roses unfortunately even though we would like to see them drift down the table sadly it won't happen.
Yes RA and his association and links to Putin and Russia may have temporarily caused a stain on the club but someone will buy them and soon it will get forgotten.
Although they have not got their new stadium built yet which must be difficult and expensive in that part of London compared to the crime ridden shit hole that Tottenham area is.
Their success over the past 20 years and the huge global fanbase that the stockpiling of trophies during that period will still make them hugely attractive to an individual or a corporation who will continue where they left off.

Of course they will, within a month they will be under new ownership, all sanctions will have been lifted and will be business as usual, and new owner will have gotten a bargain and with the delta between what he spent and their true worth he would have been willing to spend acquiring club, might invest that in stadium/players.

 

[spurs mental]

It's a bit like a team benefitting from a crap rule in the game only for the rules to change and another not receive the benefits.

You new here?

 

[riggi]

They dead yet?

 

[ohtottenham!]

They dead yet?

Not quite but let's hope they become the Pensioners again like they always were pre Abramovich.

 

[gio747]

Of course they will, within a month they will be under new ownership, all sanctions will have been lifted and will be business as usual, and new owner will have gotten a bargain and with the delta between what he spent and their true worth he would have been willing to spend acquiring club, might invest that in stadium/players.

Praying that Mike Ashley steps in!

 

[davidmatzdorf]

OK, sorry.

In that case, it's a shame they're fanatical about looking for any reason to moan, abuse and speak down to people.

Yeah, that was what I was getting at

 

[King of the Lane]

Does anyone have that graph/any stats that showed how much Roman has pumped into Chelsea in recent years? My 2 Chelsea mates are trying to convince themselves and me that they have been self sufficient for a while as their net spend is only £50m apparently.

I want to ruin both their days. Any helps is appreciated.

 

[sausage]

Does anyone have that graph/any stats that showed how much Roman has pumped into Chelsea in recent years? My 2 Chelsea mates are trying to convince themselves and me that they have been self sufficient for a while as their net spend is only £50m apparently.

I want to ruin both their days. Any helps is appreciated.

 

[King of the Lane]

You sir are a legend. Thank you - I hope you feel the Chelsea tears that are about to fall

 

[wadewill]

That's beautiful to see, even if its changed a little in the preceding year

Show's that for all their faults, ENIC run the club on the business side absolutely impeccably

Maybe we can borrow those tossers a tenner for the bus if they need it

 

[sausage]

That's beautiful to see, even if its changed a little in the preceding year

Show's that for all their faults, ENIC run the club on the business side absolutely impeccably

Maybe we can borrow those tossers a tenner for the bus if they need it

I think the -£5m in 2020 was due to the transfer embargo, but I'm not sure.


If you don't spend a penny for a year and still only make £5m profit, it suggests that things are pretty tight! At least when we did it we seemed to have it in reserves

Spoiler

ready to piss up the wall on GLC and Ndombele