Roman Abramovich Thread

[milka 3,393]

[Superblue 6,372]

4 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

He's basically saving us from going into administration and the inevitable lay offs in staff. 

The optimist in me feels Boehly will be a good owner. We won't see the abusive loan policy anymore, but I think we'll still be largely competitive. 

The mentality and use of the loan policy should shift in a different way to how we've seen in recent seasons with the likes of Tammy, RLC, Mount, James, Chalobah and now Gallagher and Broja. It should be the bridge to us bringing more players through from the academy.

I remember seeing Gallagher in pre season for Chelsea. He didn't look good enough, and I said this at the time. I've seen him a couple of times for Palace this season and he looks a different player now from the regular exposure to game time and just in general maturing as a footballer. 

That will be where the loan structure can still work. Young players will still be loaned out. The ones not good enough will be sold on and help still to bring some funds into the club, whilst hopefully there will be the odd one or two that progress to a stage where they can be good enough for the first team squad. Bringing Broja and Gallagher back next season is the equivalent to signing two young £25-30m players. 

We've only abused the loan system in the past to help adhere to FFP requirements so we don't take huge losses on poor buys. Without Roman we're going to have to be much more shrewder and patient with signings in the future and as a result we hopefully will no longer need to use it in the sheer volume that we have in the past.

[Fulham Broadway 17,333]

Have a feeling the club will sink quite a bit. It will make the new owner seem a 'saviour'. 

Think about it, Abromovichs success under his ownership is a fucking almost impossible act to follow, fucking big shoes to fill -every bit of silverware.

I saw Bates by the club for £1. That made whatever he did look good, and we were just appreciative

[ZAPHOD2319 4,819]

Trivago will stay with Chelsea during transition.

 

 

[Laylabelle 9,536]

Nothing lasts forever..Long as it can be resolved and not sink into oblivion all be okay. We can work with all this long as there is a club at the end of it all.

[DDA 9,941]

12 minutes ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

Trivago will stay with Chelsea during transition.

 

 

Let's go Trivago .... just won alot of customers for this move alone. Clever move.

[Superblue 6,372]

6 minutes ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

Trivago will stay with Chelsea during transition.

 

 

The good thing about this is you would like to assume as one of our bigger sponsors they have been in talks with the club over recent days and are being assured that the ownership of the club will change soon as everything is still just speculation at present.

Fair play to them too. The easy route is just to wash your hands clean like Three have done. Hopefully them being the first to post a statement which is extremely respectful to both Chelsea and the war in Ukraine, might be a trigger for others to just hold fire for now and not do anything rash. The wording regarding change in ownership is a perfect backdoor for them to change their minds if the situation changes for the worse.

[cosmicway 1,333]

9 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Have a feeling the club will sink quite a bit. It will make the new owner seem a 'saviour'. 

Think about it, Abromovichs success under his ownership is a fucking almost impossible act to follow, fucking big shoes to fill -every bit of silverware.

I saw Bates by the club for £1. That made whatever he did look good, and we were just appreciative

In the mid nineties I was in a tv program and there was that guy who said he represented the Liverpool supporters. When I said "my team is Chelsea" he says "ha', what a sympathetic team from London".
But why sink you recon ?
Maybe it was a Herculean task to bring us from the status of <Everton>, <QPR> to the present day status and may be this was an improbable achievement for anyone else, but why a new wealthy owner bring us down now ?
 

[Superblue 6,372]

13 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Have a feeling the club will sink quite a bit. It will make the new owner seem a 'saviour'. 

Think about it, Abromovichs success under his ownership is a fucking almost impossible act to follow, fucking big shoes to fill -every bit of silverware.

I saw Bates by the club for £1. That made whatever he did look good, and we were just appreciative

I suppose it depends on how you'd interpret 'quite a bit'. We may not win as many trophies as we have in the last 20 years, but I think we'll still remain competitive and challenge for them.

The resources Abramovich gave us is almost impossible to follow and replicate, but as long as we're purchased in a prompt manner the club is on an extremely solid footing in terms of finances (if debt free), global appeal, squad and coaching quality, academy, etc. If Tuchel had to rock this same team next season with just loan players returning we'd still be very much in the mix and likely a strong favourite for top 4.

Money is probably the easiest route to success but it's no guarantee, just like success doesn't need to be built purely on financial resources. Just ask United fans.

[Laylabelle 9,536]

7 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

The good thing about this is you would like to assume as one of our bigger sponsors they have been in talks with the club over recent days and are being assured that the ownership of the club will change soon as everything is still just speculation at present.

Fair play to them too. The easy route is just to wash your hands clean like Three have done. Hopefully them being the first to post a statement which is extremely respectful to both Chelsea and the war in Ukraine, might be a trigger for others to just hold fire for now and not do anything rash. The wording regarding change in ownership is a perfect backdoor for them to change their minds if the situation changes for the worse.

Plus with our travel budget need to use their whole compare hotel prices thing

[Pizy 18,953]

With a decent new owner in place I think the only massive change may be that the era of buying £80m-£100m players is over. We won’t be competing for the ready made superstar transfers any longer. That’s sad, but so long as we have a world class manager like Tuchel who can improve and extract the best out of talent it won’t be fatal.

We’re just going to have to get creative and smart. Spending mega money on individuals doesn’t automatically mean you’ll win.

We can take an approach like Liverpool have which is carefully scouting players with very specific characteristics that fit the managers style. They are often players that aren’t highly sought after by other big clubs and only cost £30-40m. Liverpool have been great at signing players from lesser PL clubs or from medium sized clubs in Europe.

Even if our new ownership isn’t as wealthy and willing to pump huge sums as Roman was we should still be right there in the mix for the foreseeable future. Our core will still be here long term and that core is still comfortably better than everyone other than the top 2.

Broja back, Connor back, couple of smart buys in, couple of busts currently in the ranks out. I fully expect we’ll be a top 4 club next season assuming this ownership deal gets sorted soon.

[MoroccanBlue 5,385]

Just now, Pizy said:

With a decent new owner in place I think the only massive change may be that the era of buying £80m-£100m players is over. We won’t be competing for the ready made superstar transfers any longer. That’s sad, but so long as we have a world class manager like Tuchel who can improve and extract the best out of talent it won’t be fatal.

We’re just going to have to get creative and smart. Spending mega money on individuals doesn’t automatically mean you’ll win.

We can take an approach like Liverpool have which is carefully scouting players with very specific characteristics that fit the managers style. They are often players that aren’t highly sought after by other big clubs and only cost £30-40m. Liverpool have been great at signing players from lesser PL clubs or from medium sized clubs in Europe.

Even if our new ownership isn’t as wealthy and willing to pump huge sums as Roman was we should still be right there in the mix for the foreseeable future. Our core will still be here long term and that core is still comfortably better than everyone other than the top 2.

Broja back, Connor back, couple of smart buys in, couple of busts currently in the ranks out. I fully expect we’ll be a top 4 club next season assuming this ownership deal gets sorted soon.

The very reason why we need a Dof. 

 

[Strike 7,494]

28 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

The good thing about this is you would like to assume as one of our bigger sponsors they have been in talks with the club over recent days and are being assured that the ownership of the club will change soon as everything is still just speculation at present.

Fair play to them too. The easy route is just to wash your hands clean like Three have done. Hopefully them being the first to post a statement which is extremely respectful to both Chelsea and the war in Ukraine, might be a trigger for others to just hold fire for now and not do anything rash. The wording regarding change in ownership is a perfect backdoor for them to change their minds if the situation changes for the worse.

The key sponsor to win over is Nike. 

[We Hate Scouse 10,327]

43 minutes ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

Trivago will stay with Chelsea during transition.

 

 

Hopefully this is very pertinent in our search for a new owner and we're in fact closer to a sale than is being let off. Has the potential new owner spoken to Trivago to ease concerns...

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Superblue 6,372]

7 minutes ago, Blues Forever said:

 

How are they defining profits? If it's essentially those match ticket sales get donated to Ukraine then whilst it's better to have a full house at the Bridge, it's of no real benefit to the running of the club.

If it means the ticket sales can help cover operating costs first such as the overall costs related to hosting the game, and any profit beyond this is donated then that's cool. Helps both sides and whilst I don't want to compare and group Chelsea and Ukraine, both need every bit of help at the moment.

[MoroccanBlue 5,385]

Says Three only suspended their sponsorship. 

Will we return to them after this all blows over? Its already confirmed Roman will no longer be owner, so why did they even pull out when its confirmed he won't be owner anymore?

[Blue Armour 4,448]

1 hour ago, Superblue_1986 said:

The good thing about this is you would like to assume as one of our bigger sponsors they have been in talks with the club over recent days and are being assured that the ownership of the club will change soon as everything is still just speculation at present.

Fair play to them too. The easy route is just to wash your hands clean like Three have done. Hopefully them being the first to post a statement which is extremely respectful to both Chelsea and the war in Ukraine, might be a trigger for others to just hold fire for now and not do anything rash. The wording regarding change in ownership is a perfect backdoor for them to change their minds if the situation changes for the worse.

A statement from Nike would be the biggest clue in that regard IMO. 

[ZAPHOD2319 4,819]

In this article from The Guardian it sounds like the British government are taking over the sale?

 

However the government is keen to target Abramovich rather than Chelsea, which it views as a “significant cultural asset”, and it will consider an application for a new licence that would permit a sale. Chris Philp, the digital and technology minister, said on Friday that Abramovich would be prevented from selling the club but potential buyers could approach the government with takeover proposals as long as the Russian would not benefit from the deal.

The viability of potential buyers is being discussed in political circles. Boehly and Wyss remain confident that their consortium, which includes an unnamed businessman, will be viewed favourably by the government and Premier League.

It is understood that Candy, a Tory donor, is also seen as a strong contender to buy Chelsea. The property developer is working on finding investors and his proposals include plans for an expensive redevelopment of Stamford Bridge, which could work in his favour. Candy, a Chelsea fan, is worth a reported £1.5bn.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/mar/11/nick-candy-todd-boehly-hansjorg-wyss-serious-Chelsea-buyers-government-roman-abramovich

[ZAPHOD2319 4,819]

It looks like the license to operate is something that will change as the government works with Chelsea to allow the club to operate as close to normal without Roman receiving profit. All parties that want to purchase Chelsea are now being told to contact the government with proposals.

 

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/britain-work-with-Chelsea-fc-changes-its-licence-pms-spokesman-2022-03-11/

 

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/potential-buyers-Chelsea-can-approach-uk-government-minister-2022-03-11/