Roman Abramovich Thread

[the wes 7,212]

 

[Vesper 29,017]

Swiss Court Lifts Lid on Abramovich's Aborted Residency Bid

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-court-lifts-lid-on-abramovich-s-aborted-residency-bid/44493502

(Bloomberg) -- Switzerland’s top court lifted reporting restrictions on the reasons for Roman Abramovich’s failed bid for residency in the Alpine nation, rejecting the Russian billionaire’s claims that disclosure would damage his reputation.

The Supreme Court judges cited concerns raised by Swiss police that Abramovich was “suspected of money laundering” and had “presumed contacts with criminal organizations,” according to the text of the Sept. 21 decision released Tuesday. The owner of London’s Chelsea Football Club was seeking to keep the comments out of the public.

These would make his residency in the country “a threat for public safety” and also “a reputational risk for Switzerland,” according to the document. Abramovich, through his lawyer, denies allegations of money laundering and ties to criminal organizations made by the Swiss authorities.

Abramovich built his fortune from the sale of privatized assets acquired from the former Soviet Union, including Sibneft and Aeroflot. He’s worth an estimated $14.8 billion, based in part on his ownership in steelmaker Evraz and Norilsk Nickel, and is known for his close relations to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Despite his enormous wealth, Abramovich hasn’t been seen in London since the U.K. government failed to renew his visa in the spring, amid a sharp deterioration in relations between London and Moscow.

snip

 

Has Anyone Seen Roman Abramovich? The Last Days of Londongrad

The Russian billionaire has avoided Britain for months and is preparing his finances to skirt the threat of American sanctions.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-09-25/has-anyone-seen-roman-abramovich-the-last-days-of-londongrad

In late August, as supporters of Chelsea Football Club assembled at Stamford Bridge stadium to watch their team beat London rival Arsenal, a group in the upper deck unfurled a 40-foot blue-and-red banner. “The Roman Empire,” it shouted, beside an image of the team’s owner, Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich. Just below, another banner trumpeted “15 Years, 15 Trophies.” Abramovich didn’t attend the game that day. In fact, he hasn’t been seen in London since the U.K. government failed to renew his visa in the spring, not long after it accused Russia of using a deadly nerve agent on British soil and relations between London and Moscow plunged into crisis.

Abramovich bought Chelsea out of near-bankruptcy in 2003 for £140 million (about $223 million at the time) and has since loaned the club more than £1.1 billion. Until he came along, Chelsea hadn’t won the top domestic trophy, the Premier League title, since 1955. His big spending changed all that and set off a kind of arms race in English football. In some ways, it was similar to the U.S. model: Buy talent, buy titles, and sell merchandise and media rights. But unlike owners of American sports teams, Abramovich didn’t seem bothered by racking up huge losses. (And he didn’t have to contend with caps on spending, until new rules came into force in 2010.) At the Arsenal game, Chelsea supporters taunted their rivals with the chant “We’ve won it all!” to which Arsenal fans sang in response, “You’ve bought it all!”

Chelsea fans still love their high-rolling owner, even as the U.K. government hits back at the Kremlin. Now Abramovich is mulling a sale of Chelsea, frustrated by his British visa problems and concerned about the potential fallout should the U.S. expand sanctions against wealthy Russians and target him. He’s already rejected bids for the club in excess of $2.3 billion—which would be a world-record price for a sports team—according to people familiar with the talks. Earlier this year, Abramovich hired Raine Group LLC, a merchant bank in New York, to advise on the possibility of a full or partial sale of the club. A person familiar with the discussions says Abramovich wants £3 billion. Abramovich’s representatives declined multiple requests for comment for this story and insisted all communication go through his lawyers, who also declined to comment.

With a $14.7 billion fortune derived from oil and metals, Abramovich holds his enormous wealth at the pleasure of Russian President Vladimir Putin, a status that’s put him in the crossfire of the Cold War 2.0 that’s been brewing. It’s not only his visa that’s been effectively stonewalled: In seeking ways to punish Putin, British officials appear to be slow-walking most Russian visa applications, according to immigration lawyers in London. At the same time, the government is scrutinizing the wealth of Russians using London as their base, and lawmakers have begun calling the influx of Russian cash a national security issue.

snip

[the wes 7,212]

Czech news outlet Tyden have broken the story that Petr Kellner wants to buy Chelsea.

https://www.101greatgoals.com/news/chelsea-takeover-talks-with-petr-kellner-the-richest-man-in-the-czech-republic/

[Milan 17,859]

31 minutes ago, the wes said:

Czech news outlet Tyden have broken the story that Petr Kellner wants to buy Chelsea.

https://www.101greatgoals.com/news/chelsea-takeover-talks-with-petr-kellner-the-richest-man-in-the-czech-republic/

 

[Vesper 29,017]

14 minutes ago, milan.cech said:

 

Its only a 50% stake so doesn't  completely remove us from the geo-political uncertainty. I still prefer Jim Ratcliffe (who is worth, as of this moment, more than Roman and Kellner combined, and is adding billions each year) as he is English (so no foreign ownership issues after Brexit) and also a bit older, so will bring (hopefully) an urgency to get us back to top 3 to 5 level in the world.

[the wes 7,212]

45 minutes ago, milan.cech said:

 

Is tyden a good source ?

[Vesper 29,017]

1 hour ago, the wes said:

Is tyden a good source ?

Yes, it has a good reputation in The Czech Republic. It is not a rag like the Sun, etc.

[kiwi1691 255]

On 26/10/2018 at 3:49 AM, Vesper said:

 I still prefer Jim Ratcliffe (who is worth, as of this moment, more than Roman and Kellner combined, 

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

 

[Vesper 29,017]

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 29,017]

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 29,017]

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 29,017]

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 8,784]

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.