Roman Abramovich Thread

[Vesper 30,219]

56 minutes ago, kiwi1691 said:

If  you are going to lie, don't be so blatant. 

 

James Ratcliffe

$11.5B

https://www.forbes.com/profile/james-ratcliffe/#7f432575443e

 

Roman Abramovich

$11.3B

https://www.forbes.com/profile/roman-abramovich/#62143d36134a

 

Petr Kellner

$13.2B

https://www.forbes.com/profile/petr-kellner/#104456861f0d

 

Lolol you need to update your figures. And I dont lie.

[Vesper 30,219]

56 minutes ago, kiwi1691 said:

If  you are going to lie, don't be so blatant. 

 

James Ratcliffe

$11.5B

https://www.forbes.com/profile/james-ratcliffe/#7f432575443e

 

Roman Abramovich

$11.3B

https://www.forbes.com/profile/roman-abramovich/#62143d36134a

 

Petr Kellner

$13.2B

https://www.forbes.com/profile/petr-kellner/#104456861f0d

 

%

[kiwi1691 255]

8 minutes ago, Vesper said:

Lolol you need to update your figures. And I dont lie.

I don't know how I am supposed to update their real time net worth?

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

I have to say I find it embarrassing fans speculating about what billionaires they would like to take over the club. Roman is still the owner and hopefully will remain so and I'm not getting into a political discussion about why he might not be we all know why. We have been so fortunate that he took over when we did so please give the man the respect he deserves.

A new owner coming in doesn't mean he or she will go on a massive spending spree like Roman. There are terrible owners all over the country who have fucked clubs up doesn't matter how rich they are. Lets not forget Roman doesn't give interviews which winds up the British media the new owner (if there was one) might be a massive shithead only interested in the spotlight and appearing on telly every chance they get.

[Vesper 30,219]

Just now, kiwi1691 said:

I don't know how I am supposed to update their real time net worth?

Number one, you are using USD, not Pounds sterling  (I will post both figures for all 3 billonaires ) and Forbes is notoriously inaccurate as they oftentimes use older data and simply state it as new

Ratcliffe 6 months ago was worth £21.1 billion. (thats over 27 billion USD at current FOREX rates)

https://login.thesundaytimes.co.uk/?gotoUrl=https%3A%2F%2Ffeatures.thesundaytimes.co.uk%2Frichlist%2Flive%2Frichlist

 

to show you how rapidly Ratcliffe is gaining, in 2017 he was only 17th richest Briton via the same metrics, same source. Now he is a clear number one and pulling away.

The Sunday Times 6 months ago (same sorce) indicates that Abramovich's net worth stood at £9.3 billion (11.9 billion USD). That is a billion usd higher than what you listed

I also figure Kellner real time at $11.3B USD (£8.8 billion) as his main source of wealth PPF group, has been hammered this past year, he is DOWN close to 2 billion usd

https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/profiles/petr-kellner/

add 8.8 billion quid (Kellner) to Roman's £9.3  billion

£18.1 billion, or less thn half of what Ratcliffe is worth

Ratcliffe was worth £21.1 billion 6 months ago (so there is your double, and that giving all benefit of the doubt to Kellner and Roman)

(btw the ruble has crashed the last 5 years v the pound and usd  in FOREX too, losing almost half its value, over half at one point as oil prices fell off the table, although rebounded now)

 

Ineos, the main source of Ratcliffe's wealth has exploded in value the last year and a half, so I am sure he is northwards of £23-25bn by now (maybe  a shit tonne more, as he gained 15 billion quid from 2017 to 2018

 

https://www.ft.com/content/26be7496-56a2-11e8-bdb7-f6677d2e1ce8

Mr Ratcliffe is worth more than £21bn, according to the Sunday Times, having boosted his wealth by £15.3bn in the past year compared with the nearly £6bn he was worth on last year’s list. Most of this figure comes from his 60 per cent stake in Ineos. The newspaper calculated the value of the company at £35bn — or about seven times profits.

 

btw, a P/E ratio of only 7 is an extremely conservative valuation

INEOS GROUP HOLDINGS S.A. 2017 ANNUAL REPORT

https://www.ineos.com/globalassets/investor-relations/public/annual-reports/2017-igh-sa-annual-report_final.pdf

 

[Vesper 30,219]

AS Monaco owner Dmitry Rybolovlev, the Russian oligarch who bought a Florida mansion from Trump for $95 million, and a New York condo for $88 million, has been arrested in Monaco on corruption charges.

 

This is not good for Roman, they are going to keep going after him and other Russian oligarchs, especially as it is possible the Democrats today take back both houses of the US Congress and will go after Trump and all Russian power players with a vengeance

 

These Russian oligarchs are now on Washington's watchlist

https://money.cnn.com/2018/01/30/news/russian-oligarchs-treasury-trump/index.html

 

They own Arsenal, Chelsea and the Brooklyn Nets. They buy coveted pieces of art and major stakes in Silicon Valley tech companies.
And now they're on Washington's watchlist.

The United States released a list of prominent Russians with close ties to the Kremlin on Monday, implementing a law designed to punish Moscow for election meddling.

snip

 

Dmitry Rybolovlev

 

Dmitry Rybolovlev, a fertilizer magnate, is well known for his extraordinary art and real estate deals.

He is the former owner of Leonardo da Vinci's Salvator Mundi, which became the most expensive artwork to ever sell at auction in November. Rybolovlev bought the painting for $127.5 million in 2013, and sold it for $450.3 million.

Rybolovlev's daughter Ekaterina made headlines in 2011 when a trust under her name purchased a Manhattan condo for $88 million, a record price at the time.

Rybolovlev himself bought a $95 million beachfront estate in Palm Beach, Florida in 2008 from Trump Properties.

 

Mikhail Prokhorov

 

Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the NBA's Brooklyn Nets, made his billions in the precious metals sector.

Prokhorov has also shown political ambitions. He ran in the 2012 Russian presidential election against Putin, finishing in third place.

 

Roman Abramovich

 

Roman Abramovich is best known as the owner of Chelsea, the soccer club that he purchased for $233 million in 2003.

He too was once active in politics, having served in the lower house of Russia's parliament and as a provincial governor.

 

Oleg Deripaska

 

Oleg Deripaska is the owner of the industrial group Basic Element, which according to its website operates everything from rail and auto manufacturers. Deripaska also owns energy company EN+.

He is also a former business associate of Paul Manafort, who served as Trump's campaign chairman.

Deripaska emerged from the notoriously tumultuous Russian aluminum wars of the 1990s with a massive fortune. He was hit hard by a sharp decline in commodities prices during the financial crisis, but has since found his footing.

 

snip

Russian Billionaire Oleg Deripaska Surrendering To U.S. Sanctions

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2018/11/02/russian-billionaire-oleg-deripaska-surrenders-to-u-s-sanctions/#375fe8332afd

 

Russian oligarchs face new US sanctions

https://en.crimerussia.com/oligarchs/russian-oligarchs-face-new-us-sanctions/

The sanction list will cover new businessmen.

 

The US Department of Treasury intends to expand the list of Russian oligarchs on whom sanctions will be imposed. The penalties will be introduced before Christmas, the political Telegram channel Nezygarpens.

Roman Abramovich (Evraz), Alisher Usmanov (USM Holdings), Vladimir Yevtushenkov (MTS, Sistema), Vladimir Potanin (Norilsk Nickel, Interros), Alexei Mordashov (Severstal), Vladimir Lisin (NLMK and Universal Cargo Logistics) and Mikhail Prokhorov (Onexim) face new sanctions.

At the same time, a more rigid approach is to be applied.

"The US believes that new sanctions imposed before Christmas will inflict a strike to the Russian economy and cause mayhem into companies’ activities on the eve of the holidays," the report states.

Another US sanctions against the Russian Federation were introduced in August 2018 out of the attempt on Skripal in the UK. A ban was imposed on the export of goods and technologies related to national security.

snip

[OneMoSalah 8,886]

Don't see why fans are looking and comparing owners net worth? Jesus this isn't like the transfer market where we are looking to sign a striker to replace one leaving 😂 I mean I have seen some ridiculous shit in my time on here but Roman is going nowhere and even if he was comparing owners net worth is just tedious because nobody is going to acquire the club unless they have a certain amount of money anyway....

[BlueLyon 9,359]

There is alot of talk we have been pulling restraints in spending money last few years, but if you look at the numbers, we are only behind city in total fees since 2010 (according to Cies). 

10. Atletico Madrid have spent £688.74million in transfer fees since 2010 9. Roma have spent £729.31million in transfer fees since 2010 8. Real Madrid have spent £822.16million in transfer fees since 2010 7. Liverpool have spent £965.50million in transfer fees since 2010 6. Juventus have spent £978.12million in transfer fees since 2010 5. Manchester United have spent £993.45million in transfer fees since 2010 4. Paris Saint-Germain have spent £1.120billion in transfer fees since 2010 3. Barcelona have spent £1.258billion in transfer fees since 2010 2. Chelsea have spent £1.310billion in transfer fees since 2010 1. Manchester City have spent £1.325billion in transfer fees since 2010

Our spending isnt weak at all, we just spend it on absolutely wrong players with some exceptions.

[Sideshow Luiz 2,310]

37 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

There is alot of talk we have been pulling restraints in spending money last few years, but if you look at the numbers, we are only behind city in total fees since 2010 (according to Cies). 

10. Atletico Madrid have spent £688.74million in transfer fees since 2010 9. Roma have spent £729.31million in transfer fees since 2010 8. Real Madrid have spent £822.16million in transfer fees since 2010 7. Liverpool have spent £965.50million in transfer fees since 2010 6. Juventus have spent £978.12million in transfer fees since 2010 5. Manchester United have spent £993.45million in transfer fees since 2010 4. Paris Saint-Germain have spent £1.120billion in transfer fees since 2010 3. Barcelona have spent £1.258billion in transfer fees since 2010 2. Chelsea have spent £1.310billion in transfer fees since 2010 1. Manchester City have spent £1.325billion in transfer fees since 2010

Our spending isnt weak at all, we just spend it on absolutely wrong players with some exceptions.

Those figures aren't "net" though are they?  

[BlueLyon 9,359]

4 hours ago, Sideshow Luiz said:

Those figures aren't "net" though are they?  

Nope, a total transfer fees, loan fees,...

Net spent balance is around 1,1bn for City, 700m for Psg, 650m for United, 550m for Barca, 400m for Chelsea and 360m for Real (top 6 net spenders).

Sure we managed to get whole lot of money from sales, but what the fuck did we spend it on? 

Real and Barca are funded by state loans, psg and city use money laundry tactics, United too probably and they get away with ffp still. We did it fairly and got money from sales plus whatever we could afford without breaking ffp. Yet at the end of the day club spent 1,3bn on players like Torres, Morata, Drinkwater, Bakayoko,...doesnt matter if it was net spend or not. We still forked big chunks of cash on players. 

And before someone still talks about net spent, look at Juve and Real who both did much better than Chelsea over last 8 years and spent less. 

Also talking about not being able to compete with top clubs for top players, its just not true. Maybe the very best (expensive) like Neymar or Mbappe, sure, but 100m something are all available if we decided to go for. While Barca paid 120m on Dembele, we decided to fork 150m on Bakayoko, Drinkwater and Morata. One might think we couldnt afford to pay 120 on single player, but look where Morata, Bakayoko and Drinkwater are now. We had to spend another 60m on Jorginho, Kovacic loan fee and buy Giroud. On top of that very likely we will still need another expensive striker. 

Instead of buying top striker one summer, top midfielder next summer etc etc, we go for these short fixes that in the end cost us time, more cash and just a lot of frustration. 

Either you buy someone cheap and hope he turns well, or just fork whatever necessary for top player. We go for middle with decent, but nothing special players who are done after a season and still cost a shitload of cash. 

The board has zero clue. We have been sorting LB and striker since Cole and Drogba and still couldnt find two fucking players, good enough to stay for like 5 years. And you dont even need to spend shitload of cash. Liverpool got Robertson for peanuts for example. Conte was complaining about signings, as did many fans but lets not forget the problem was who we bought, not the cash. 150m on three players alone, but all were wrong choices. Instead of buying 3 quality players and put 2 from academy,  we go for 5 quantity players. A year later, most suck, so we have to sell them and we need to buy new ones to keep squad numbers and again we dont bring quality. Rinse and repeat. Maybe once every few years, we actualy get a great player like Hazard, Azpi, Jorginho or Kante, but its anomaly not a rule. Our current board needs a damn director and we are fucking with that too for several months now. Cant we just get things done quick like any ambitious club does? Who sticks without dof for so long? And dont get me putting Marina in charge lol. She is good with income, but this needs some football brain. We bought so many shit or temporary players and got rid of so many good ones its no fucking coincidence anymore and no one at the club got the stick yet. 

We can only thank higher force to have luck with managers recently who did wonders with given players. 

Only United is doing worse considering amount of cash spent and results. We won 2 titles yes but we also didnt play CL twice in three years now which is terrible considering all the cash we fork on players. 

P.s. now this seems like a massive rant, but its just pointing how things are IMO. Not that I dont enjoy supprting the team this or any previous seasons. I actualy think we are doing great this year so far. The club given the players is doing very well except for that Mourinho final season and last half of season. But the board is total garbage for years now. They fuck things up and coach gets the blame.

I miss days of Kenyon at helm.

[Sideshow Luiz 2,310]

6 hours ago, BlueLyon said:

Nope, a total transfer fees, loan fees,...

Net spent balance is around 1,1bn for City, 700m for Psg, 650m for United, 550m for Barca, 400m for Chelsea and 360m for Real (top 6 net spenders).

Sure we managed to get whole lot of money from sales, but what the fuck did we spend it on? 

Real and Barca are funded by state loans, psg and city use money laundry tactics, United too probably and they get away with ffp still. We did it fairly and got money from sales plus whatever we could afford without breaking ffp. Yet at the end of the day club spent 1,3bn on players like Torres, Morata, Drinkwater, Bakayoko,...doesnt matter if it was net spend or not. We still forked big chunks of cash on players. 

And before someone still talks about net spent, look at Juve and Real who both did much better than Chelsea over last 8 years and spent less. 

Also talking about not being able to compete with top clubs for top players, its just not true. Maybe the very best (expensive) like Neymar or Mbappe, sure, but 100m something are all available if we decided to go for. While Barca paid 120m on Dembele, we decided to fork 150m on Bakayoko, Drinkwater and Morata. One might think we couldnt afford to pay 120 on single player, but look where Morata, Bakayoko and Drinkwater are now. We had to spend another 60m on Jorginho, Kovacic loan fee and buy Giroud. On top of that very likely we will still need another expensive striker. 

Instead of buying top striker one summer, top midfielder next summer etc etc, we go for these short fixes that in the end cost us time, more cash and just a lot of frustration. 

Either you buy someone cheap and hope he turns well, or just fork whatever necessary for top player. We go for middle with decent, but nothing special players who are done after a season and still cost a shitload of cash. 

The board has zero clue. We have been sorting LB and striker since Cole and Drogba and still couldnt find two fucking players, good enough to stay for like 5 years. And you dont even need to spend shitload of cash. Liverpool got Robertson for peanuts for example. Conte was complaining about signings, as did many fans but lets not forget the problem was who we bought, not the cash. 150m on three players alone, but all were wrong choices. Instead of buying 3 quality players and put 2 from academy,  we go for 5 quantity players. A year later, most suck, so we have to sell them and we need to buy new ones to keep squad numbers and again we dont bring quality. Rinse and repeat. Maybe once every few years, we actualy get a great player like Hazard, Azpi, Jorginho or Kante, but its anomaly not a rule. Our current board needs a damn director and we are fucking with that too for several months now. Cant we just get things done quick like any ambitious club does? Who sticks without dof for so long? And dont get me putting Marina in charge lol. She is good with income, but this needs some football brain. We bought so many shit or temporary players and got rid of so many good ones its no fucking coincidence anymore and no one at the club got the stick yet. 

We can only thank higher force to have luck with managers recently who did wonders with given players. 

Only United is doing worse considering amount of cash spent and results. We won 2 titles yes but we also didnt play CL twice in three years now which is terrible considering all the cash we fork on players. 

P.s. now this seems like a massive rant, but its just pointing how things are IMO. Not that I dont enjoy supprting the team this or any previous seasons. I actualy think we are doing great this year so far. The club given the players is doing very well except for that Mourinho final season and last half of season. But the board is total garbage for years now. They fuck things up and coach gets the blame.

I miss days of Kenyon at helm.

I don't disagree with you at all.  I was just asking if that fee was net, because second highest spend in the league didn't pass the eye (or rather, smell) test.

Our purchases have been terrible as a whole.  I think we got good value for Alonso and Rudiger recently (besides who you have mentioned) but "value" signings are Arsenal-eque level of ambition.  But the summer of '17 was abysmal.  We got in, Zappacosta, Drinkwater, Bakayoko, Morata, and Rudiger.  When you play the 0-net transfer game (and we didn't even do that), you need to do better than 1/5.  

It comes back to the same things, over and over. 

1.  Need a Club Identity. 

2.  A DoF who can oversee that. 

3.  A manager who fits that profile and keeps the team playing in that manner. 

4.  Then, the right players to fit that system (and you get the advantage of being able to spot them when they are younger, because you know what you need). 

The club keep asking the manager to do tasks 1 and 3, while the board gets the players in that fit their profile (whatever that is).  Actually, they want the manager to come in and change the club identity.  The manager is expected to be Cruyff, while the board try to run things like...I don't even know...it's directionless.

Yes, we got Jorginho in who was definitely a Sarri want.  I honestly think we got lucky there.  I think he was in the right place at the right time to stop the pissing match between Marina and ADL.

And yes I agree with you, the team has been fun to watch this season.  But, there is a problem in the background that's been there for years, and it doesn't look like it's getting sorted any time soon.

[the wes 7,212]

roman abramovich list six russian oligarchs targeted uk intelligence

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/07/romanabramovich-list-six-russian-oligarchs-targeted-uk-intelligence/

[Vesper 30,219]

15 minutes ago, the wes said:

roman abramovich list six russian oligarchs targeted uk intelligence

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/07/romanabramovich-list-six-russian-oligarchs-targeted-uk-intelligence/

I have been warning of this for ages!! The club NEEDS TO BE SOLD before we get seized and then REALLY fucked. The pressure is only going to get worse as Trump slides down into his pool of shit and the USA House of Representatives (now under full Democratic control) really starts to put the boots to all with massive investigations. Also the Mueller investigation will do tremendous damage to this, and with Brexit, the UK will be drawn evermore into complete orbit with the US, and thus far more likely to strike out viciously at all things Russian.

 

The Prime Minister has approved the list and the names of the oligarchs will be circulated across Whitehall departments and shared with the UK’s allies in Europe and in North America in an attempt to disrupt their ability to travel and to maintain their business empires.

It signals a ratcheting up of Britain’s new cold war with the Kremlin following the nerve agent attack on Salisbury in March.

A senior Whitehall security source said: “The aim of the measures we intend to take is to limit their manoeuvrability and their ability 
to travel and operate freely in Britain, Europe and elsewhere.

“These individuals have been identified as having an extremely close professional and financial relationship with President Putin. We believe they are involved in doing the Kremlin’s bidding on a whole range of fronts, which includes using their financial muscle on behalf of the Russian state.

“Roman Abramovich is on the list because he is 
believed to be Mr Putin’s most important financial supporter.”

[the wes 7,212]

8 hours ago, Vesper said:

I have been warning of this for ages!! The club NEEDS TO BE SOLD before we get seized and then REALLY fucked. The pressure is only going to get worse as Trump slides down into his pool of shit and the USA House of Representatives (now under full Democratic control) really starts to put the boots to all with massive investigations. Also the Mueller investigation will do tremendous damage to this, and with Brexit, the UK will be drawn evermore into complete orbit with the US, and thus far more likely to strike out viciously at all things Russian.

 

The Prime Minister has approved the list and the names of the oligarchs will be circulated across Whitehall departments and shared with the UK’s allies in Europe and in North America in an attempt to disrupt their ability to travel and to maintain their business empires.

It signals a ratcheting up of Britain’s new cold war with the Kremlin following the nerve agent attack on Salisbury in March.

A senior Whitehall security source said: “The aim of the measures we intend to take is to limit their manoeuvrability and their ability 
to travel and operate freely in Britain, Europe and elsewhere.

“These individuals have been identified as having an extremely close professional and financial relationship with President Putin. We believe they are involved in doing the Kremlin’s bidding on a whole range of fronts, which includes using their financial muscle on behalf of the Russian state.

“Roman Abramovich is on the list because he is 
believed to be Mr Putin’s most important financial supporter.”

It's not looking good 

[Unionjack 7,531]

I knew there was another reason I liked the old boy! He hates Spuds!

 

What Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich said that will anger ALL Tottenham fans

 

ROMAN ABRAMOVICH was once interested in buying Tottenham - but quickly changed his mind after a trip to north London.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/751750/Chelsea-news-Roman-Abramovich-Tottenham-comments

[Vesper 30,219]

On 15/11/2018 at 5:34 AM, BlueLyon said:

Nope, a total transfer fees, loan fees,...

Net spent balance is around 1,1bn for City, 700m for Psg, 650m for United, 550m for Barca, 400m for Chelsea and 360m for Real (top 6 net spenders).

Sure we managed to get whole lot of money from sales, but what the fuck did we spend it on? 

Real and Barca are funded by state loans, psg and city use money laundry tactics, United too probably and they get away with ffp still. We did it fairly and got money from sales plus whatever we could afford without breaking ffp. Yet at the end of the day club spent 1,3bn on players like Torres, Morata, Drinkwater, Bakayoko,...doesnt matter if it was net spend or not. We still forked big chunks of cash on players. 

And before someone still talks about net spent, look at Juve and Real who both did much better than Chelsea over last 8 years and spent less. 

Also talking about not being able to compete with top clubs for top players, its just not true. Maybe the very best (expensive) like Neymar or Mbappe, sure, but 100m something are all available if we decided to go for. While Barca paid 120m on Dembele, we decided to fork 150m on Bakayoko, Drinkwater and Morata. One might think we couldnt afford to pay 120 on single player, but look where Morata, Bakayoko and Drinkwater are now. We had to spend another 60m on Jorginho, Kovacic loan fee and buy Giroud. On top of that very likely we will still need another expensive striker. 

Instead of buying top striker one summer, top midfielder next summer etc etc, we go for these short fixes that in the end cost us time, more cash and just a lot of frustration. 

Either you buy someone cheap and hope he turns well, or just fork whatever necessary for top player. We go for middle with decent, but nothing special players who are done after a season and still cost a shitload of cash. 

The board has zero clue. We have been sorting LB and striker since Cole and Drogba and still couldnt find two fucking players, good enough to stay for like 5 years. And you dont even need to spend shitload of cash. Liverpool got Robertson for peanuts for example. Conte was complaining about signings, as did many fans but lets not forget the problem was who we bought, not the cash. 150m on three players alone, but all were wrong choices. Instead of buying 3 quality players and put 2 from academy,  we go for 5 quantity players. A year later, most suck, so we have to sell them and we need to buy new ones to keep squad numbers and again we dont bring quality. Rinse and repeat. Maybe once every few years, we actualy get a great player like Hazard, Azpi, Jorginho or Kante, but its anomaly not a rule. Our current board needs a damn director and we are fucking with that too for several months now. Cant we just get things done quick like any ambitious club does? Who sticks without dof for so long? And dont get me putting Marina in charge lol. She is good with income, but this needs some football brain. We bought so many shit or temporary players and got rid of so many good ones its no fucking coincidence anymore and no one at the club got the stick yet. 

We can only thank higher force to have luck with managers recently who did wonders with given players. 

Only United is doing worse considering amount of cash spent and results. We won 2 titles yes but we also didnt play CL twice in three years now which is terrible considering all the cash we fork on players. 

P.s. now this seems like a massive rant, but its just pointing how things are IMO. Not that I dont enjoy supprting the team this or any previous seasons. I actualy think we are doing great this year so far. The club given the players is doing very well except for that Mourinho final season and last half of season. But the board is total garbage for years now. They fuck things up and coach gets the blame.

I miss days of Kenyon at helm.

big spending Chels is a myth (except for first two years)

 

here is our net spending under Roman

Transfer spending under Abramovich (net)

2003-04: £151.4m
2004-05: £146.8m

NO MORE BIG SPENDING

2005-06: £51.7m
2006-07: £32.2m
2007-08: £13.8m

2008-09: £12.7m PROFIT
2009-10: £23.6m
2010-11: £94.5m

here is the last 8 years

2011-12: £57.7m
2012-13: £75.8m

2013-14  £47.6m

2014-15  £6.4m PROFIT

2015-16  £2.7m

2016-17  £21.9m

2017-18 £54.1m

2018-19 £75.1m (partial)

total

£328.5 for the last 8 years (365.8m euros)

that's almost a BILLION LESS than the article >>> ( https://www.talkchelsea.net/news/chelseas-spending-since-2010-has-been-revealed-and-its-ridiculous/ ) states

£41.1m per year net spend on average

 

total £829.8 m over 16 year time frame that Abramovich has owned us 

works out to around £51.9m NET per year

36% of ALL money net spent was in the first 2 years

take away those first  2 years

the average net spend over last 14 seasons (per year) is £37.8m 

[BlueLyon 9,359]

3 hours ago, Vesper said:

big spending Chels is a myth (except for first two years)

 

here is our net spending under Roman

Transfer spending under Abramovich (net)

2003-04: £151.4m
2004-05: £146.8m

NO MORE BIG SPENDING

2005-06: £51.7m
2006-07: £32.2m
2007-08: £13.8m

2008-09: £12.7m PROFIT
2009-10: £23.6m
2010-11: £94.5m

here is the last 8 years

2011-12: £57.7m
2012-13: £75.8m

2013-14  £47.6m

2014-15  £6.4m PROFIT

2015-16  £2.7m

2016-17  £21.9m

2017-18 £54.1m

2018-19 £75.1m (partial)

total

£328.5 for the last 8 years (365.8m euros)

that's almost a BILLION LESS than the article >>> ( https://www.talkchelsea.net/news/chelseas-spending-since-2010-has-been-revealed-and-its-ridiculous/ ) states

£41.1m per year net spend on average

 

total £829.8 m over 16 year time frame that Abramovich has owned us 

works out to around £51.9m NET per year

36% of ALL money net spent was in the first 2 years

take away those first  2 years

the average net spend over last 14 seasons (per year) is £37.8m 

Its good that we sell many players to keep net spending low. But that doesnt change the fact that we fork 200+m every year on new players and generaly do it very bad.

For example two summers ago, we spend 260m on new players. Sure net spent was 60m, because we generated 200m from player sales.

BUT we still spent 260m, we had 260m to spend on new players. And what did we spend 260m on? Bakayokos, Morata, Drinkwaters. 

 260m, we could get top tier player or two.

Im not arguing about our net spend which is very very good. But about the fact we have 200m+ to spend per season and we dont show for it.

[Vesper 30,219]

42 minutes ago, BlueLyon said:

Its good that we sell many players to keep net spending low. But that doesnt change the fact that we fork 200+m every year on new players and generaly do it very bad.

For example two summers ago, we spend 260m on new players. Sure net spent was 60m, because we generated 200m from player sales.

BUT we still spent 260m, we had 260m to spend on new players. And what did we spend 260m on? Bakayokos, Morata, Drinkwaters. 

 260m, we could get top tier player or two.

Im not arguing about our net spend which is very very good. But about the fact we have 200m+ to spend per season and we dont show for it.

The players we buy mostly turn out either blääää or are shown to be instant or eventual shit. Our success ratio is horrendous. Many of the good ones we end up selling for far too low.

Drinkwater is the first type.

KdB the second.

[mccg 1,528]

Chelsea fans sent worrying Roman Abramovich transfer message by Sky Sports man

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/756696/Chelsea-transfer-news-Roman-Abramovich-Maurizio-Sarri-Sky-Sports

[DDA 9,941]

3 hours ago, mccg said:

Chelsea fans sent worrying Roman Abramovich transfer message by Sky Sports man

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/756696/Chelsea-transfer-news-Roman-Abramovich-Maurizio-Sarri-Sky-Sports

Nothing we don't know already, although I would like to remind everyone that we broke the World Record fee for a GK only in the last window.