Jump to content

hachejay

Members
  • Content Count

    37
  • Donations

    £0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hachejay

  • Rank
    New Signing
  • Birthday 29/10/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Argyll
  • Interests
    The colour blue

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    hachejay
  1. well here's a snippet of an article on it from last week... http://www.givemefootball.com/340601-chelsea-set-for-stamford-bridge-exit
  2. https://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&t=p&vpsrc=6&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=200618240859811444463.0004ae7555340816369c6 that's a pretty old link but it still gives a good impression of what still are the discussed locations. i read a report about it a few months back but i cant find it unfortunately. but i remember it saying nine elms was still the desired location if anything was to go ahead.
  3. oh god no, i'm not saying i think Torres should stay or that Roman would keep for that reason... just that he has a lot more value than just as a mis-firing over-paid striker that seems to be the general consensus here. as an investment for RA i just think that there is more to the picture with torres and making such a ridiculously huge signing in the first place to simply say; "he cost a lot of money, he's been sh*t, count your losses and move on" chelsea fc is not just a club anymore it's being pushed and built as a global brand and business, a practice that has been succesful in making us the 4th biggest club in the world (ok, that's another point that can be argued i admit) and in that respect (irregardless of the football) i'm just saying that i think roman will look at players in a different light than us as fans would normally. ofcourse he needs to get a damn striker that can shoot straight and he wants the club to win, but there's a business side to signings that goes beyond just what the player can do on the pitch. as an extreme example look at beckham and psg. he isn't exactly there to play football now is he? he's there to promote some rich oil dudes new toy. not saying torres is the same at all, just that there's always more to everything than meets the eye, especially in football, business and roman abramovich. yeah my bad, meant million. i've been counting in thousands for some reason today and i confused myself. 2011/12 we shipped 910,000 apparently.
  4. I was wondering similar myself actually after watching the new adidas promotions for the 2013/14 kit... I can hardly be the only one to notice the prominence of Torres and the absence of Lampard in it, and while one can read into that what they want, it more made me ponder the marketability and brand value that Torres actually is to RA and the club. Now, Torres is not as impressive a figure as he once was, but he is still and incredibly popular player with huge appeal internationally as well. He's a clean-cut, good looking, well mannered striker that has one two European championships and the world cup scoring in all competetions and 2 finals... he is an internationally well known figure with huge appeal at a time when Chelsea are looking to drive into foreign markets to promote the brand and is young enough still to spearhead that. A few years back he sold more shirts than anyone else in the country, possibly the world, and while Chelsea refused to comment in the last survey on who sells the most shirts now, at the last check it was still Torres. The first year he arrived he sold more shirts in the last half of that season than drogba or lampard (the next two most popular) did in the entire season. Chelsea are now the 4th biggest seller of shirts in the world (after united, Barcelona and real) pushing coming on for a billion units a year and growing. If Torres maintained his popular status and continued to sell like that, selling maybe, 10 to 15% of the shirts (just guessing outloud here) then at 55 quid a pop your actually getting a good chunk of those wages back from him. Through in other merchandise sales and the fact that his popularity makes him a walking talking billboard for the club than I don't know that he doesn't start to seem like a reasonable person to keep around. I dunno, i'm just thinking off my head here and I am no football economics expert by any means. As a player investment... obviously very poor... as a brand investment... he's actually pretty damn good if you ask me. Anyway, feel free to tell me what a crock of sh*te i'm talking... just food for thought for yall!
  5. very true, although lampard's record against top teams is hardly great either and I don't see many ppl claiming he should go for that reason. mata's done great against the better sides this year, one of many things that proves his indespensibility at the moment. but yeah, you know, having a striker that could do it would be nice.

×
×
  • Create New...