Stamford Bridge Thread

[steve5221 91]

Bollocks to John Terry as a conduit

Admire the fella as a footballer and no one can question that he puts something back in on the charity front, but he's just passing through and has no real concept of why the CPO was set up.

He says trust Roman, I'd say hold on, there is a fella down the road suing him for £3.5 billion because he trusted him and got burnt (allegedly). I'd like to hear from the man himself not suits full of fuck all like Buck and Gourlay using Terry as a puppet

Without reading through the whole thread here mate, whats the big issue with voting yes??. Is it due to the fact that most "no's" want us to stay at the bridge due to historical reasons, or is it that they do realise we have to move but do not trust any of the above's intentions and want more say in where we go??. I can understand if the "no's" are for the second reason and want more input into our future. I would not trust Buck, Gourlay or Ambramovich but when he has put so much dough into the club already surely he wants to set us up for the future??. Bottom line is we will not compete with Man U consistantly unless we move and the reason for that is the new FFP rules.

[barzil33 0]

There are plans for how the new stadium be built? Like the emirates? Like at Old Trafford?

please give me an answer.

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

Without reading through the whole thread here mate, whats the big issue with voting yes??. Is it due to the fact that most "no's" want us to stay at the bridge due to historical reasons, or is it that they do realise we have to move but do not trust any of the above's intentions and want more say in where we go??. I can understand if the "no's" are for the second reason and want more input into our future. I would not trust Buck, Gourlay or Ambramovich but when he has put so much dough into the club already surely he wants to set us up for the future??. Bottom line is we will not compete with Man U consistantly unless we move and the reason for that is the new FFP rules.

Afternoon Steve

Its mainly the latter. The underhand way its being done, and we're supposed to swallow that these club employees are speaking of their own accord. Funny how it went from a small part of the original statement that actually mentioned the possibility of moving, to - two weeks later - our club captain talking about how great it will be at our big, new stadium. That sort of underhandedness is central to what has caused so many supporters to campaign to vote 'No'.

So that's now Terry, Cundy, Minto and Harris who have all spoken in favour of the move. One thing they all have in common, other than being ex-players: they are all currently employed by Chelsea Football Club. All of them have been quoted on the official website too. Would love an ex-player to have the balls to come out and say, they'd vote 'No' - wonder if that would be top story on the website?

Ok it maybe the FFP may be a factor, so may Abramovich possibly having £3bn less in his wallet shortly be another factor.

[MikeCFC 45]

Without reading through the whole thread here mate, whats the big issue with voting yes??. Is it due to the fact that most "no's" want us to stay at the bridge due to historical reasons, or is it that they do realise we have to move but do not trust any of the above's intentions and want more say in where we go??. I can understand if the "no's" are for the second reason and want more input into our future. I would not trust Buck, Gourlay or Ambramovich but when he has put so much dough into the club already surely he wants to set us up for the future??. Bottom line is we will not compete with Man U consistantly unless we move and the reason for that is the new FFP rules.

That is wrong.CPO's that are voting NO don't particually want to stay at Stamford Bridge,most have accepted that we do have to move as it's nigh on impossible to expand The Bridge due to various complications ie:residents,H&F council etc.

The main issue is the location of our proposed site which the club have not disclosed but we believe they already know about.

There is a clause in the CPO contract that the club will not relocate more than 3 miles away from Stamford Bridge BEFORE the year 2020 which is nearly eight years away.

If the club get the 75% share of the YES vote they require then they have full control of the club,and after 2020 they can move us anywhere they like.

Had of the club been more transparent about their plans and intentions then this issue would be resolved more ammicably.

Most of us fans favour a move to either Earls Court or Battersea Nine Elms,not the crime ridden ghetto's of NW10

Let's hope the club are listening!.

[MikeCFC 45]

He denies any intention to move -yet bought 100 shares in April giving him 100 votes. Whats he doing multiple votes to stay ? Dont think so.

Other interesting things on that prog -eg Man City are only where they are because of the Commonwealth Games.

Sheik Mansour and his cronies only interested in Citeh because they inherited that stadium. Which suggests that if West Ham had managed to secure the Olympic Stadium, some rich billionaire would have come along and had them as a playything as well.....

Afternoon Greg

City are laughing as their stadium is owned by Manchester councils so FFP does not affect them in that sense.

Reasons behind West Ham's bid for the Olympic Stadium falling through is that the IOC do not want the stadium to lose it's identity with Athletics.

With FFP regulations soon to be enforced,Roman cannot buy a stadium,it has to be done through the sale of the site which Stamford Bridge sits on,which we all know who holds all the cards to that.

[Blue Armour 4,436]

I''m sorry if this sounds naive, but can't the CPO members request some sort of agreement on paper, that the move (if required) will be to one of the favored locations within the 3 mile radius? I also think that the recent turn of events means they (the board) have a location in mind...

[eldo 868]

Afternoon Greg

City are laughing as their stadium is owned by Manchester councils so FFP does not affect them in that sense.

Reasons behind West Ham's bid for the Olympic Stadium falling through is that the IOC do not want the stadium to lose it's identity with Athletics.

With FFP regulations soon to be enforced,Roman cannot buy a stadium,it has to be done through the sale of the site which Stamford Bridge sits on,which we all know who holds all the cards to that.

I always thought that Roman could build the stadium from his own pocket and it wouldn't affect the FFP.

[MikeCFC 45]

I''m sorry if this sounds naive, but can't the CPO members request some sort of agreement on paper, that the move (if required) will be to one of the proposed locations within the 3 mile radius? I also think that the recent turn of events means they (the board) have a location in mind...

Also for the CPO,in order to vote YES the location clause gets increased by another 20/40 years so on the passing of our current board and/or future board members,they too don't try to relocate us outside 3 miles of SW6.

Location IS important.Those who think otherwise obviously have never been to Stamford Bridge.

[steve5221 91]

That is wrong.CPO's that are voting NO don't particually want to stay at Stamford Bridge,most have accepted that we do have to move as it's nigh on impossible to expand The Bridge due to various complications ie:residents,H&F council etc.

The main issue is the location of our proposed site which the club have not disclosed but we believe they already know about.

There is a clause in the CPO contract that the club will not relocate more than 3 miles away from Stamford Bridge BEFORE the year 2020 which is nearly eight years away.

If the club get the 75% share of the YES vote they require then they have full control of the club,and after 2020 they can move us anywhere they like.

Had of the club been more transparent about their plans and intentions then this issue would be resolved more ammicably.

Most of us fans favour a move to either Earls Court or Battersea Nine Elms,not the crime ridden ghetto's of NW10

Let's hope the club are listening!.

Interesting, I can see your point but utimately I would be prepared to sacrifice location for us becoming a bigger club.It is easy for me to say that though as I do not go anymore and only watch on the tele, whereas I see you put you hard earned dough into the club by buying a season ticket. I think the perfect scenario would be for the NO vote to be passed this time around, with the CPO indicating they would be able to change thier stance if a series of criteria were met. This could then be negotiated with the club and an acceptable proposal to move be accepted.

I think the club have underestimated the CPO shareholders intelligence here and are now thinking of slimy ways to get fans on board(getting the captain and manager to speak out publicly will win the kids over but not the adults with half a brain).

BTW - I'm in Richmond, not a million miles from Isleworth....

[MikeCFC 45]

I always thought that Roman could build the stadium from his own pocket and it wouldn't affect the FFP.

Totally contradictray.FFP states that a football club owner cannot use his personal wealth to finance their club.However,there is a naming rights loophole in the regulations which Man City recentley adopted.

[MikeCFC 45]

Interesting, I can see your point but utimately I would be prepared to sacrifice location for us becoming a bigger club.It is easy for me to say that though as I do not go anymore and only watch on the tele, whereas I see you put you hard earned dough into the club by buying a season ticket. I think the perfect scenario would be for the NO vote to be passed this time around, with the CPO indicating they would be able to change thier stance if a series of criteria were met. This could then be negotiated with the club and an acceptable proposal to move be accepted.

I think the club have underestimated the CPO shareholders intelligence here and are now thinking of slimy ways to get fans on board(getting the captain and manager to speak out publicly will win the kids over but not the adults with half a brain).

BTW - I'm in Richmond, not a million miles from Isleworth....

I'm in same boat as you mate.i don't go reguarly anymore(priced out of the game).Club should also reconsider reducing ticket prices with certain concessions especially for Champions League group games.

CPO should also have a say in new stadium,and i don't mean having your name on some stupid "walk of honour".

I live just off the Hounslow SWT railway,so Battersea would be ideal for me,or Earls Court eitherway and with Earls Court we don't have to change pubs so local businesses don't suffer too.

Say NO CPO

[Fulham Broadway 17,299]

Afternoon Greg

City are laughing as their stadium is owned by Manchester councils so FFP does not affect them in that sense.

Reasons behind West Ham's bid for the Olympic Stadium falling through is that the IOC do not want the stadium to lose it's identity with Athletics.

With FFP regulations soon to be enforced,Roman cannot buy a stadium,it has to be done through the sale of the site which Stamford Bridge sits on,which we all know who holds all the cards to that.

Interesting, and they seem to have it all sewn up already,. Its the arrogance of a few multi-millionaires treating the people who propped up the club in hard times and kept the club going, by treating them like mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed on bullshit) that winds up the real fans

If they were a bit more up front and said ''this is what we want to do, what do you think ?''

There is s solution as far as I can see. I think the move is inevitable, but the CPO's should be given a transferable ownership clause, thereby stopping Abramovich selling his plaything at a future date because some other Berezovsky has come out the woodwork and he potentially loses the case.

After all, would he rather lose his 4 multi million pound yachts , or sell a category A football club in a brand new stadium in central London, when the arse has fallen out of the Soccer Business ? Only he can answer that.

[steve5221 91]

I'm in same boat as you mate.i don't go reguarly anymore(priced out of the game).Club should also reconsider reducing ticket prices with certain concessions especially for Champions League group games.

CPO should also have a say in new stadium,and i don't mean having your name on some stupid "walk of honour".

I live just off the Hounslow SWT railway,so Battersea would be ideal for me,or Earls Court eitherway and with Earls Court we don't have to change pubs so local businesses don't suffer too.

Say NO CPO

Small world again mate, know that area well as my sister in law lives down Argyle Road (or maybe avenue) opposite the car dealership...

[MikeCFC 45]

I was reading in yesterday's Evening Standard that the CPO are getting tough and going full circle with a protest planned ahead of Saturday evening's game with Everton-distributing leaflets with Say No CPO.This will now go global as the game is being televised and fully show the football world CPO's hand and everything they stand for.

I wonder wether Richard King will be available for comment?.

[LDN Blue 7,903]

From what I understand, the Say No CPO campaign isn't because of the initial point of moving but because of not enough information provided by Chelsea FC? Especially with the question of what happens after 2012 (when they say the will range out of the 3mile radius)

Am I right in thinking this? Or are they against Roman owning 100% of the club?

The latter is a ridiculous reason imo.