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

[spursfan77]

He is.

Apparently not, thank fuck

British billionaire Ratcliffe NOT considering Chelsea bid

Sir Jim Ratcliffe appears to have been ruled out of the running to succeed Roman Abramovich as the next owner of Chelsea.

www.standard.co.uk

 

[lincspurs]

Has Ratcliffe ever been linked as a potential buyer to us?

 

[wrd]

I'm waiting for this:

 

[Tucker]

I reckon this is why the government are dragging their feet on naming him. Hell, would you even be surprised if it was their idea! Sell it before we can pin the sanctions on you to avoid such a scenario. Weird, as it would be popular with 99% of their voters across the country!

It’s a bit of a minefield, would likely put a lot of people out of work at the stadium and training ground, back offices etc. Would clubs even be allowed to play them?

Seems a moot point though, as the government don’t have the stomach to take him on.

 

[bigfrooj]

It does seem he may be playing both sides and giving his public image a little cleanse with this 'love of the club' and donating to casualties of war.

I may be talking bollox but i have a feeling a deal has been done.

How much will he actually be donating when all is done and dusted? He says the proceeds of the sale of Chelsea but that may be minuscule once its been through the machinations of accounting. Abramovich won't be donating £3-4bn, that's for sure, to Ukraine humanitarian charities - I doubt it will be even a tenth of that so as to still look good to the West and not upset Putin too much.

 

[spursfan77]

It’s a bit of a minefield, would likely put a lot of people out of work at the stadium and training ground, back offices etc. Would clubs even be allowed to play them?

Seems a moot point though, as the government don’t have the stomach to take him on.

See above. Might not even happen at all

 

[Trotter]

How much will he actually be donating when all is done and dusted? He says the proceeds of the sale of Chelsea but that may be minuscule once its been through the machinations of accounting. Abramovich won't be donating £3-4bn, that's for sure, to Ukraine humanitarian charities - I doubt it will be even a tenth of that so as to still look good to the West and not upset Putin too much.

Well based on statements I think he would be repaying sale proceeds less the amount outstanding to Camberley Intl Investments less fees, he has said Chelsea won’t be repaying loan, all he would do is repay the loan with the sale proceeds, that would always have been his plan anyway, he was never going to call in the loan.
So with the loan being at c. 1.5bn, let’s say he generates 2.5bn sale, legal/broker costs maybe 10m, would leave 990m donation to charity.

 

[worcestersauce]

Bear in mind that the UK government has not put sanctions on any Russian oligarchs yet, they've said that they have but they've set it ahead so they can do what they can to get their money out. Abramovich should be sanctioned and have his assets frozen now and if that includes Chelsea so be it. I've been saying it for twenty years. It's no good Chelsea fans saying the club shouldn't suffer because of his crimes as they've benefitted from his crimes so I've got no sympathy for them.

 

[donny1013]

One of my friends works at Ineos. I’ve asked before about Ratcliffe buying an English team and was told it would only ever be Utd as he supports them. His preference is smaller clubs, like Nice for example and they have a team in Switzerland. Don’t think there would be any chance he would bid for Chelsea.

 

[thebenjamin]

If you were a buyer surely you'd lowball the fuck out of this.

 

[worcestersauce]

Whoever takes over, unless it's an oil sheikhdom, they are not going to hand over the kind of money Abramovich has because they won't be laundering dirty Russian money.

 

[wrd]

Whoever takes over, unless it's an oil sheikhdom, they are not going to hand over the kind of money Abramovich has because they won't be laundering dirty Russian money.

To be honest though, the damage has been done hasn't it, they built the foundations, now it will be easy to keep ticking over. It's now become self sustainable especially when the debt might be wiped out.

If FFP has any credibility then that won't be the case.

 

[DarwinSpur]

He stole billions from the people of Russia and used some of it to get himself a safe home in London.

Yeah but he won some trophies for some fans so it all balances out

 

[chas vs dave]

Am I the only one who thinks that as a commercial entity, spurs should be valued higher than Chelsea?

They don't own all of the stadium, it's also in major need of refurbishment.

 

[Trotter]

Am I the only one who thinks that as a commercial entity, spurs should be valued higher than Chelsea?

They don't own all of the stadium, it's also in major need of refurbishment.

No, I am sure Levy and Lewis think the same.
Any independent valuers wouldn't though

 

[chas vs dave]

No, I am sure Levy and Lewis think the same.
Any independent valuers wouldn't though

Why? Commercial revenues are similar.

The only thing Chelsea have is the players and profile.

You'd argue that there is more potential upside with spurs.

 

[wrd]

Am I the only one who thinks that as a commercial entity, spurs should be valued higher than Chelsea?

They don't own all of the stadium, it's also in major need of refurbishment.

We are valued higher aren't we, the stadium makes a big difference

 

[Trotter]

We are valued higher aren't we, the stadium makes a big difference

By our owners maybe, not by anyone independent such as Forbes.

If you value your house at £1m, but nobody is prepared to pay more than £250k for it, it does not make it a £1m asset.

 

[Tucker]

If I were spending a substantial sum of money on a football club, I’d want to know that I was going to actually own the pitch they play on.

 

[wrd]

By our owners maybe, not by anyone independent such as Forbes

I dont think Forbes looked into the fact that they dont own their own stadium and name tbh