Stamford Bridge Thread

[TheIceMan 596]

For sure someone is using this as wallpaper for his desktop!

[kiwi1691 255]

Updated renders

[Adnane 1,101]

Wow !

[TrueChelseaBlue 105]

Impressive stuff from Neil there...

[1chelsea 864]

Can't wait for the start of this project and our return to the bridge

[RhesusReus 219]

No! I hate those roofs!

Newcastle has this bar like roof on one side, and it casts a horrible shadow on the pitch, blocking out the play when you watch it on TV.

I hate that! Ugh. Well, Let's hope all our games are night matches come 2020.

[Magic Lamps 11,451]

No! I hate those roofs!

Newcastle has this bar like roof on one side, and it casts a horrible shadow on the pitch, blocking out the play when you watch it on TV.

I hate that! Ugh. Well, Let's hope all our games are night matches come 2020.

No! I hate those roofs!

Newcastle has this bar like roof on one side, and it casts a horrible shadow on the pitch, blocking out the play when you watch it on TV.

In

I hate that! Ugh. Well, Let's hope all our games are night matches come 2020.

Hate the newcastle roof too. Looks like a greenhouse. But I guess ours will be a bit more classy. Still no clue why those bars. We got only 12 acres space and limit it even further by plugging pillars around the stadium? I would go as high and narrow as possible.

If abramovich really pays the stadium on his own it would be too grateful even for his standards. Should call it abramobridge^^ . but I guess he is too modest for this. Actually great we stay at our venue other than some clubs with so called tradition.

[thekid9 418]

Hate the newcastle roof too. Looks like a greenhouse. But I guess ours will be a bit more classy. Still no clue why those bars. We got only 12 acres space and limit it even further by plugging pillars around the stadium? I would go as high and narrow as possible.

If abramovich really pays the stadium on his own it would be too grateful even for his standards. Should call it abramobridge^^ . but I guess he is too modest for this. Actually great we stay at our venue other than some clubs with so called tradition.

The Stadium cannot be built any higher than it all ready is! that's why they are digging down! they space out the way on some sides won't matter as the hotel(s) and restaurants are going!

[KevinAshburner 1,270]

those who live in London and England what is you're thoughts on this.

Chelsea FC: 11 reasons why the Blues should move to Surrey

10 JULY 2015 - BY STUART RICHARDS , PETE BRYANT , TOM SMURTHWAITE

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/lifestyle/fun-stuff/chelsea-fc-11-reasons-blues-9629204

I know that we are staying at Stamford Bridge. I just wanted to get you're thoughts on this Article.

[DavidEU 2,023]

those who live in London and England what is you're thoughts on this.

Chelsea FC: 11 reasons why the Blues should move to Surrey

10 JULY 2015 - BY STUART RICHARDS , PETE BRYANT , TOM SMURTHWAITE

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/lifestyle/fun-stuff/chelsea-fc-11-reasons-blues-9629204

That's a significant distance from where we are now and would be a lot harder for the majority of fans to get too. 99% of fans want to stay where we are now.

[!Hazard! 3,394]

I love the renders and the look of the new Bridge! But I wish the open roof-circle will be bigger as it seems it will be blocking out most of the sunlight regardless of the time.

[Billy. 2,739]

[kmk108 1,186]

I don't like the circular roof cutout as much as the rectangular one in the first renderings.

[OhForAGreavsie 5,776]

Hate the newcastle roof too. Looks like a greenhouse. But I guess ours will be a bit more classy. Still no clue why those bars. We got only 12 acres space and limit it even further by plugging pillars around the stadium? I would go as high and narrow as possible.

If abramovich really pays the stadium on his own it would be too grateful even for his standards. Should call it abramobridge^^ . but I guess he is too modest for this. Actually great we stay at our venue other than some clubs with so called tradition.

That wasn't the impression I got from reading the presentation material and press articles. Rather I expected that Roman would be lending the club the money to build the New Bridge rather than sourcing the loan on the market which would cost more and probably require more disclosure (to any lender) about its financial affairs than the club seem comfortable with these days.

For Roman simply to give the club the money does not seem to make any sense to me. Of course if that's what he wants to do then who are we to argue.

[mrparkersdogbite 15]

That wasn't the impression I got from reading the presentation material and press articles. Rather I expected that Roman would be lending the club the money to build the New Bridge rather than sourcing the loan on the market which would cost more and probably require more disclosure (to any lender) about its financial affairs than the club seem comfortable with these days.

For Roman simply to give the club the money does not seem to make any sense to me. Of course if that's what he wants to do then who are we to argue.

I think you are right on this. People seem to have got carried away with the idea of Roman building us all a stadium as a act of outstanding benevolence but that doesn't seem to be his way (most of his loans to the club are still noted as debts on the Fordstam balance sheet). So if Roman does pay for the building work the total cost, which is likely to be a lot more than £500m in my view, will probably sit there in the Fordstam accounts as an additional debt. That said I remember Bruce Buck talking about the financing of the stadium back in 2011 and he mentioned a combination of Roman's own cash and bank loans. But however the project is financed it raises the question of the CPO and whether Roman will ask for its dissolution as his price for financing the redevelopment. After all, why would someone invest a lot of money in an asset that doesn't really belong to them?

[OhForAGreavsie 5,776]

I think you are right on this. People seem to have got carried away with the idea of Roman building us all a stadium as a act of outstanding benevolence but that doesn't seem to be his way (most of his loans to the club are still noted as debts on the Fordstam balance sheet). So if Roman does pay for the building work the total cost, which is likely to be a lot more than £500m in my view, will probably sit there in the Fordstam accounts as an additional debt. That said I remember Bruce Buck talking about the financing of the stadium back in 2011 and he mentioned a combination of Roman's own cash and bank loans. But however the project is financed it raises the question of the CPO and whether Roman will ask for its dissolution as his price for financing the redevelopment. After all, why would someone invest a lot of money in an asset that doesn't really belong to them?

Indeed.

Putting loans into Chelsea Ltd is absolutely the best way for Roman to take cash back out of the club should that ever become the right thing for him to do. We have to keep in mind that while Chelsea FC PLC have no debts, the PLC is owned by Chelsea Ltd and Chelsea Ltd do owe money to one of Roman's companies. Given our historic financial losses, it's not likely that Chelsea Ltd will face corporation tax liabilities any time soon but it is entirely prudent to plan for the future.

If the football club continue to make profits then Chelsea Ltd will too and, eventually, all of its tax write-offs due to the mountain of losses over the years, will have expired or been used up. In that situation Chelsea Ltd could be hit with tax demands which is where the loans would come into play. Instead of declaring a profit, and paying tax on it, Chelsea Ltd would simply repay a part of its loan. Profit gone, tax liability gone and Roman has some of his cash back without his having to pay tax on it either.

Now I wouldn't want anyone to get me wrong, I'm no Maggie Thatcher. I believe in society; I recognise that it costs money to run, organise and protect. I therefore don't shirk, or begrudge, my own taxes and I don't approve when anyone else does. This mechanism I'm talking about however is no tax dodge, it's a perfectly standard business practice. It allows people to invest and build businesses which generate the wealth that ultimately pays for society. Chelsea FC, along with the rest of football, already make an enormous contribution to the national coffers and that's how it should be.

[pHaRaOn 2,131]

Chelsea sold a higher percentage of tickets for their home games than any club in England last season.

Stamford Bridge – a ground the Premier League champions are planning to redevelop – was at 99.8 per cent capacity on average during Chelsea's march to the title.

[xPetrCechx 13,548]

Chelsea sold a higher percentage of tickets for their home games than any club in England last season.

Stamford Bridge – a ground the Premier League champions are planning to redevelop – was at 99.8 per cent capacity on average during Chelsea's march to the title.

Only 41k seats...