The Next Manager?

[Pizy 18,855]

It's bordering on comical at this stage. I mean, I'm starting to think the club are trolling us now.

United have made 2 signings already, Liverpool have made 2 signings already, Arse have made 1 signing and are on the verge of signing the Greek CB from Dortmund. They've already appointed their manager and have been hard at work bringing in targets. City have made concrete offers for Mahrez and Jorginho according to reliable sources.

Meanwhile, not a peep from the club that arguably needs the most surgery.

Seriously, I'm actually starting to think that behind the scenes in secret we've actually got quite a bit done (new manager already signed up, targets already convinced to join) but we're waiting and waiting for Conte to find his next job before announcing anything. It's the only explanation that makes sense. There's surely no way our club can be as incompetent as they appear to from the outside, right?

[11Drogba 2,000]

Maybe she also has visa problems?

[AK-3001 286]

It's important to note that Chelsea don't usually leak information and there's no one really close to the club that leaks information on Twitter like other clubs. 

 

Liverpool were the worst, with their team sheets available hours or sometimes a day before kick off. City also has a few leaks here or there. While Chelsea don't. Matt Law usually is clueless, but seems to get the information or a detailed summary, if you may, of the events that have already happened. He usually doesn't know himself, what's going on in the club.

 

Think of the Morata signing. There were rumours about him like we have with Seri and Icardi right now, but it spread on Twitter pretty late and within hours, the deal was announced by the official website. 

 

Relax. Not many people know what's going on in the club right now, but they need to sell papers, so they'll just put a few pieces of puzzle together and speculate, to sell papers to Chelsea fans.

[Dimitr 488]

12 minutes ago, Pizy said:

It's bordering on comical at this stage. I mean, I'm starting to think the club are trolling us now.

United have made 2 signings already, Liverpool have made 2 signings already, Arse have made 1 signing and are on the verge of signing the Greek CB from Dortmund. They've already appointed their manager and have been hard at work bringing in targets. City have made concrete offers for Mahrez and Jorginho according to reliable sources.

Meanwhile, not a peep from the club that arguably needs the most surgery.

Seriously, I'm actually starting to think that behind the scenes in secret we've actually got quite a bit done (new manager already signed up, targets already convinced to join) but we're waiting and waiting for Conte to find his next job before announcing anything. It's the only explanation that makes sense. There's surely no way our club can be as incompetent as they appear to from the outside, right?

You are not wrong 

but you say that 34years old Lichtensteiner  is a good buy? 

Or papastathopoulos? Haha of course not! 

Man city made offers but until now no deals done. 

Also  Fred,dalot don’t scare me. 

 

[Dimitr 488]

8 minutes ago, 11Drogba said:

Maybe she also have visa problems?

The best wish  all time.

[Pizy 18,855]

Just now, Dimitr said:

You are not wrong 

but you say that 34years old Lichtenstein is a good buy? 

Or papastathopoulos? Haha of course not! 

Man city made offers but until now no deals done. 

Also  Fred,dalot don’t scare me. 

 

It's not just about the quality (or perceived lack thereof) of the players our rivals have bought, it's the fact that their managers are getting the exact players they want and are getting them in early. Mourinho has personally asked for two Portuguese speaking players that I'm sure he knows well. Both are very highly rated. These rivals are going to have their new signings getting full preseason's and ready to hit the ground running on opening day.

We don't even have a proper preseason planned do we? That's bonkers! There's still plenty of time to go, but our recent history in the market has shown a pattern that so far looks to be continuing. Fucking around, looking for cheap, cut price deals and missing out on top players.

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

Think some of you have slowly realised through no fault of your own is that  Chelsea always has been and always will be a fucking circus. The Premier League finances for 2016-17 have just been published and who despite winning the league are the only top club not to make a profit yes Chelsea.

[Superblue 6,372]

17 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Think some of you have slowly realised through no fault of your own is that  Chelsea always has been and always will be a fucking circus. The Premier League finances for 2016-17 have just been published and who despite winning the league are the only top club not to make a profit yes Chelsea.

Although we won the league, we didn't play in Europe, not even the Europa League so the accounts would have taken a hammering both in TV money and gate/merchandise revenue.

2017/18 I would expect to look far healthier, whilst 2018/19 will drop again without the Champions League but I don't think will drop as much as that year.

 

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

29 minutes ago, Superblue_1986 said:

Although we won the league, we didn't play in Europe, not even the Europa League so the accounts would have taken a hammering both in TV money and gate/merchandise revenue.

2017/18 I would expect to look far healthier, whilst 2018/19 will drop again without the Champions League but I don't think will drop as much as that year.

 

That's all true but we did make it to the cup final as well which would have generated a bit of extra dosh but obviously not on Champions League scale. Anyway here's the link.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/06/premier-league-finances-club-guide-2016-17

[Jype 6,398]

15 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

That's all true but we did make it to the cup final as well which would have generated a bit of extra dosh but obviously not on Champions League scale. Anyway here's the link.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/06/premier-league-finances-club-guide-2016-17

FA Cup is still mickey mouse level when it comes to income for the clubs. Lower league clubs can have a huge pay day in the cup if they make it to later rounds but to PL top6 it's pocket change, when making the final will only net £900K in prize money plus a percentage of ticket revenue. Compare that to tens of millions received from the Champions League participation and I'm sure you see there's a big difference. 

I'd be really, really surprised if the club's financial statement for 17/18 season wasn't in healthy profit. New Nike deal and some smaller sponsorships (ie. the sleeve sponsor) kicked in and the club also got £55M from the CL so there should be no way the club made a loss in the past year. Next year is possible with no CL money again, but we'll see about that later.

Btw that Guardian article is wrong too:

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11668/11188750/chelsea-announce-15-3m-profit-after-player-sales-counterbalance-operating-loss

Accounts for 16/17 were released six months ago and the club posted a profit of £15.3M instead of the loss of £14M as suggested by the article you linked.

[Fulham Broadway 17,300]

3 hours ago, BluesMadLad said:

I disagree this is boring as fuck now.

OK we'll wake you up when something happens

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

11 minutes ago, Jype said:

FA Cup is still mickey mouse level when it comes to income for the clubs. Lower league clubs can have a huge pay day in the cup if they make it to later rounds but to PL top6 it's pocket change, when making the final will only net £900K in prize money plus a percentage of ticket revenue. Compare that to tens of millions received from the Champions League participation and I'm sure you see there's a big difference. 

I'd be really, really surprised if the club's financial statement for 17/18 season wasn't in healthy profit. New Nike deal and some smaller sponsorships (ie. the sleeve sponsor) kicked in and the club also got £55M from the CL so there should be no way the club made a loss in the past year. Next year is possible with no CL money again, but we'll see about that later.

Btw that Guardian article is wrong too:

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11668/11188750/chelsea-announce-15-3m-profit-after-player-sales-counterbalance-operating-loss

Accounts for 16/17 were released six months ago and the club posted a profit of £15.3M instead of the loss of £14M as suggested by the article you linked.

Well it does say in the Guardian link they they are the most recently published reports from Companies House which makes them pretty much gospel. If you look at Palace they are in the shit with the taxman and that story only came to light this week.

[Tomo 21,751]

Can someone explain why Blanc is so so bad? Now don't get me wrong he is far from my first choice but some of the stuff being said about him here is quite frankly pathetic and screams moaning for the sake of it, just by reading comments on here you'd think he's the French Sammy Lee

If we inexplicably cock up Sarri's deal, we could do a lot worse than a serial title winner.

[Jype 6,398]

28 minutes ago, Iggy Doonican said:

Well it does say in the Guardian link they they are the most recently published reports from Companies House which makes them pretty much gospel. If you look at Palace they are in the shit with the taxman and that story only came to light this week.

Yeah, I digged a little deeper:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/12/29/chelsea-reveal-financial-losses-season-spent-champions-league/

Club made the profit of £15.3M but the parent company Fordstam Ltd made a loss of £14.2M which is the figure mentioned by Guardian. Telegraph say the difference is attributed to stadium redevelopment costs, which I would assume wasn't required to be put on the club's books at all because it's not really football related and Abramovich paid those himself instead of using the club's accounts. The money still shows up on Fordstam's accounts as a debt to Abramovich tho.  

Either way, my point still remains that the club's finances are fine at the moment and will show a big improvement for the 17/18 accounts. 

[Iggy Doonican 4,186]

2 minutes ago, Jype said:

Yeah, I digged a little deeper:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/12/29/chelsea-reveal-financial-losses-season-spent-champions-league/

Club made the profit of £15.3M but the parent company Fordstam Ltd made a loss of £14.2M which is the figure mentioned by Guardian. Telegraph say the difference is attributed to stadium redevelopment costs, which I would assume wasn't required to be put on the club's books at all because it's not really football related and Abramovich paid those himself instead of using the club's accounts.

Either way, my point still remains that the club's finances are fine at the moment and will show a big improvement for the 17/18 accounts. 

I think fine is being a bit generous it's going to be a rocky few years.