Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and join in with the discussions! Click Here

Stamford Bridge thread


 Share
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

The problem is.. Chelsea Pitch Owners, right?

Exactly, any move needs to be approved by them. If they don't approve and we still move Chelsea FC will be no longer and we'll have to rename to something like AFC Chelsea or Chelsea Athletic or some pony name like that.

I don't think the CPO would win a vote this time around though. Last time hundreds of shares were bought by club members to vote in favour of the move and the move was rejected by just under 15% IIRC

The club know how many more they need to buy now and I imagine the move this time around would be approved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi. Here is a first *rough* colour render. I've so many things to fix on this image, but thought I'd show you what progress has been made.

The design of the four new stands will take their inspiration not from the uniform style of most recent stadiums, but from the buttresses, pillars and gothic architecture of Westminster Abbey in whose

It'll be close to 65k. 2 Bridges, 1 to West Brompton and 1 to the back of Fulham Broadway. They will lower the ground. Wembley is looking the most likely temp ground.

Posted Images

The problem is.. Chelsea Pitch Owners, right?

Well, let's not forget that 61% voted in favour of selling their shares to the club in 2011 and did so in full expectation that this would eventually lead to the club relocating. Granted we're now talking about moving further away from SB than was imagined at the time, but the size of that vote suggests people could be open to persuasion if a good case is made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, any move needs to be approved by them. If they don't approve and we still move Chelsea FC will be no longer and we'll have to rename to something like AFC Chelsea or Chelsea Athletic or some pony name like that.

I don't think the CPO would win a vote this time around though. Last time hundreds of shares were bought by club members to vote in favour of the move and the move was rejected by just under 15% IIRC

The club know how many more they need to buy now and I imagine the move this time around would be approved.

Probably another black mark on Ron Gourlay too.

I do think you're right though, they'll have to have recognised now that for Chelsea to keep growing it requires larger streams of revenue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, any move needs to be approved by them. If they don't approve and we still move Chelsea FC will be no longer and we'll have to rename to something like AFC Chelsea or Chelsea Athletic or some pony name like that.

I don't think the CPO would win a vote this time around though. Last time hundreds of shares were bought by club members to vote in favour of the move and the move was rejected by just under 15% IIRC

The club know how many more they need to buy now and I imagine the move this time around would be approved.

The move just couldn't happen without CPO agreement, full stop. Without that agreement the land at SB could not be sold/used for redevelopment. Without that income to fund the new development, the whole scheme would be an economic non starter. Mind you this might put The CPO under serious financial pressure. They already can't repay their debt, I don't see who they could reasonably expect to sell many more shares to if the club moved out.

Although Chelsea Holdings wouldn't admit it, I don't doubt that the economics of the whole thing weigh heavy among the reasons the club would probably prefer to relocate rather than rebuild. Since the costs of a new stadium, on a new site, can be offset, or even covered entirely, by the profits from redeveloping The Bridge, moving is actually likely to be much cheaper. Perhaps to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds. That, plus the possibility of creating a super new home which will serve the club for the next fifty years, at a super new site where we could be based into the distant future, sells me on the move. I know I'm in a minority on this however.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the thing is with the cpo how water tight is it exactly? To us mere mortals we expect it to be just, to Bruce buck an acquisitions lawyer and the rest of Romans legal dept I'm sure a loophole has been found and NOT exploited yet, it would look terrible if the club didn't liase withe cpo bad pr, but crucially I think if it came to it they could do something, I'd imagine it would be to do with the cpo not servicing the debt and forcing them to liquidate the company.

The cpo is a complicated business as they don't own the ground just the land it's on and I'm sure the name change thing won't fly either if challenged enough in court, I don't want to make out that the cpo has less power than it thinks but I'm pretty sure most of not all points will be able to be challenged and won by the club if they really wanted to go down that route.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the thing is with the cpo how water tight is it exactly? To us mere mortals we expect it to be just, to Bruce buck an acquisitions lawyer and the rest of Romans legal dept I'm sure a loophole has been found and NOT exploited yet, it would look terrible if the club didn't liase withe cpo bad pr, but crucially I think if it came to it they could do something, I'd imagine it would be to do with the cpo not servicing the debt and forcing them to liquidate the company.

The cpo is a complicated business as they don't own the ground just the land it's on and I'm sure the name change thing won't fly either if challenged enough in court, I don't want to make out that the cpo has less power than it thinks but I'm pretty sure most of not all points will be able to be challenged and won by the club if they really wanted to go down that route.

What I'm about to say comes from memory and a far, far, less than expert understanding so someone with better knowledge, or better memory, may be able to correct me. In which case please do help me out. :) So, that said...

As I think I understand it, there is a potential loophole to the CPO's ownership of the lease but it's not quite the one you've speculated about. The CPO borrowed the money from the club to pay the £10m cost of the lease but this was on an open ended and interest free basis. That's to say, there is neither a repayment schedule nor any due date by which the money must be repaid. This means that Chelsea can never go to a court and claim that CPO are behind with their payments so there's no opportunity for Chelsea to ask a court to grant them repossession of the lease.

If this is right then, with the lease having about 185 years remaining, the CPO and the club could be locked in this marriage for a long time.

The loophole I mentioned is, I believe, that the protection which the CPO has from Chelsea does not extend to any creditors of the club. If Chelsea should go bust owing money then its creditors could ask a court to order the club to realise all of its assets in order to meet its debts. Those assets would include the money owed to it by CPO so, in those circumstances, a court could order CPO to repay the money or give up the lease. Of course, barring something extraordinary, there is no way CPO could pay.

You'd have to say however that, as things stand, this scenario is a remote possibility. Meanwhile, if anyone knows enough to contradict or amend what I've said, I'd be glad to read about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kingston would be difficult, we should buy those horrible tower blocks and knock them down. That'd be nice.

We'd most likely have to move further out to Tolworth/Epsom/Chessington way.

Loads of vacant land off the a3 near esher, not a million miles from cobham so the club can prepare out our facilities home match days, just a matter of the club investing in public transport amongst other community projects and jobsagoodun, a whole lot easier to get a 60k stadium that way then the fulham rd, could build supporter facilities as well, food outlets parking bars etc etc dream come true for the club really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loads of vacant land off the a3 near esher, not a million miles from cobham so the club can prepare out our facilities home match days, just a matter of the club investing in public transport amongst other community projects and jobsagoodun, a whole lot easier to get a 60k stadium that way then the fulham rd, could build supporter facilities as well, food outlets parking bars etc etc dream come true for the club really.

Only issue is Esher/Oxshott/Cobham sort of way is very affluent. I very much doubt the local councils would approve 60k drunken football hooligans (as they'd stereotype them) in the area every other weekend.

Epsom Downs would be a fantastic choice. It has good transport links and it would likely improve the transport and potentially attendance for the horse racing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only issue is Esher/Oxshott/Cobham sort of way is very affluent. I very much doubt the local councils would approve 60k drunken football hooligans (as they'd stereotype them) in the area every other weekend.

Epsom Downs would be a fantastic choice. It has good transport links and it would likely improve the transport and potentially attendance for the horse racing.

If the club invested in its own car parks tube stations and bars/food all on site then the drunken football fans Enmass would be self contained, so less likely to cause a nuisance to locals if played that way it could fly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Any one have a spare ticket for the city game will pay good money

Mate, I know your intentions are good but, firstly, this is the wrong thread for this question. Try checking out the tickets section. Secondly, and more importantly, we do not allow people talking on here about selling or buying tickets for anything other than face value. That would be considered ticket touting which is the club rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Chair speaking about the existing feasibility study by Abramovich into the redevelopment of the ground. Says CPO is regularly updated.

Chair reports statement from CFC: 'hugely positive' advances, which 'should help the club with any plans to redevelop the current stadium'.

https://twitter.com/blueschronicle

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...