What's new

Random Rumours

Water is wet.

Skint? CL money, new shirt sponsor and the CWC money alone is something that the new owners have not had on the table until now. It's something new, meaning extra money in the financial books and gold in terms of FFP.

Of course they must also sell in order to balance the books. Can't just add to make the squad even bigger now that the loaning of players rules have also changed. Not that long ago you could have easily loaned 25 players, not anymore now.

Actually I believe that the club are now waiting to see how much the CWC brings into the bank so that they know how much value that adds in terms of FFP. Also they probably wait for the outcome of this competition to negociate better terms for a new shirt sponsor.

If anything, the way this club is currently run in terms of finances is actually brilliant.

 
Water is wet.

Skint? CL money, new shirt sponsor and the CWC money alone is something that the new owners have not had on the table until now. It's something new, meaning extra money in the financial books and gold in terms of FFP.

Of course they must also sell in order to balance the books. Can't just add to make the squad even bigger now that the loaning of players rules have also changed. Not that long ago you could have easily loaned 25 players, not anymore now.

Actually I believe that the club are now waiting to see how much the CWC brings into the bank so that they know how much value that adds in terms of FFP. Also they probably wait for the outcome of this competition to negociate better terms for a new shirt sponsor.

If anything, the way this club is currently run in terms of finances is actually brilliant.
Click to expand...
Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

 
Water is wet.

Skint? CL money, new shirt sponsor and the CWC money alone is something that the new owners have not had on the table until now. It's something new, meaning extra money in the financial books and gold in terms of FFP.

Of course they must also sell in order to balance the books. Can't just add to make the squad even bigger now that the loaning of players rules have also changed. Not that long ago you could have easily loaned 25 players, not anymore now.

Actually I believe that the club are now waiting to see how much the CWC brings into the bank so that they know how much value that adds in terms of FFP. Also they probably wait for the outcome of this competition to negociate better terms for a new shirt sponsor.

If anything, the way this club is currently run in terms of finances is actually brilliant.
Click to expand...
Why wait till the end of Club World Cup to negotiate a better sponsorship deal? Any savvy partner would want the global exposure. I reckon they are struggling to get anyone to cough up what they want. It will be an easier sell if we had any marquee players or globally marketable players but then kids..

There is also an argument that the football sponsorship market has peaked. Utd currently don’t have a sponsor for their training kit. Spurs haven’t still sold their stadium naming rights, and Juventus recently signed a 10yr Adidas deal for the same amount they were paid for their prior 8yr deal.

 
With Minerals on this, we are broke. Literally look at what we're doing selling the womens team and hotels. I think history will look back on the gallagher sale and condemn us. There is something really odd about that with Felix coming the other way. For whatever Roman is alleged to have done, this lot seem bonkers to spend money on anything with a pulse that can kick a ball. Its just really odd. All of it.

 
With Minerals on this, we are broke. Literally look at what we're doing selling the womens team and hotels. I think history will look back on the gallagher sale and condemn us. There is something really odd about that with Felix coming the other way. For whatever Roman is alleged to have done, this lot seem bonkers to spend money on anything with a pulse that can kick a ball. Its just really odd. All of it.
Click to expand...
Our co-owner, the guy who is part of BlueCo, also just bought the majority stock for LA Lakers for 10B.

A guy like that won't allow billion dollar assets to get to the point where that asset doesn't make money

 
Our co-owner, the guy who is part of BlueCo, also just bought the majority stock for LA Lakers for 10B.

A guy like that won't allow billion dollar assets to get to the point where that asset doesn't make money
Click to expand...
Does depend on the motive of the owners tbh. Like we didnt have debt after Roman (Written off/however he cooked his books), we are now in debt (however theyre cooking the books) Just depends on who owns the debt and when they send the grim repo men in to collect. We're what, four years into the project and not turned a profit until selling the womens team this year?? i guess this season better deliver or we'll be in a bit of a financial pickle.

 
Our co-owner, the guy who is part of BlueCo, also just bought the majority stock for LA Lakers for 10B.

A guy like that won't allow billion dollar assets to get to the point where that asset doesn't make money
Click to expand...
Co owner? He is a minority shareholder

 
No we are not.

Where do you get your information from because it’s nearly always BS.
Click to expand...
So how do you explain not paying the 5m to get the GK?

Why are Chelsea considering selling Josh?

WE HAVE TO SELL BEFORE WE BUY

 
Does depend on the motive of the owners tbh. Like we didnt have debt after Roman (Written off/however he cooked his books), we are now in debt (however theyre cooking the books) Just depends on who owns the debt and when they send the grim repo men in to collect. We're what, four years into the project and not turned a profit until selling the womens team this year?? i guess this season better deliver or we'll be in a bit of a financial pickle.
Click to expand...
No cooking of the books with Roman. Where is the evidence of this with Chelsea. The clubs borrowings were as a subordinated loan against Abramovich's holding company. Upon the enforced sake of the club he wrote that debt off. I think this is also forgotten. The fact that the sale proceeds were impounded as part of the sanction still doesn't clear the club's debt. Roman wrote that off.

This lot took the clean position and have run up a similar level of debt, but in just 3 years. The big difference of course, is that the debt they have run up has been to external financial organisations. This debt will have to be serviced.

I don't think that the two scenarios are comparable.

 
No cooking of the books with Roman. Where is the evidence of this with Chelsea. The clubs borrowings were as a subordinated loan against Abramovich's holding company. Upon the enforced sake of the club he wrote that debt off. I think this is also forgotten. The fact that the sale proceeds were impounded as part of the sanction still doesn't clear the club's debt. Roman wrote that off.

This lot took the clean position and have run up a similar level of debt, but in just 3 years. The big difference of course, is that the debt they have run up has been to external financial organisations. This debt will have to be serviced.

I don't think that the two scenarios are comparable.
Click to expand...
We owed Roman billions and we owe someone else billions with this lot, does it really matter who it is owed to? (didnt the new kings report the old king for financial irregularities) With both owners we bought, under roman finished products, with the new lot hyped youngsters. turns out Romans way was cheaper to sustain success.

Bottom line is club owes 1.5 billion. (Roman most likely would have recouped what he spent on us if he ever wanted to sell up)

Lord knows what happens to chelsea under the new lot and how much they'll sell for. i reather suspect we'll all be supporting Real CFC playing on Battersea Common at some point when the club moves to New York. Anyhow, thunderstorm stops play...

 
We owed Roman billions and we owe someone else billions with this lot, does it really matter who it is owed to? (didnt the new kings report the old king for financial irregularities) With both owners we bought, under roman finished products, with the new lot hyped youngsters. turns out Romans way was cheaper to sustain success.

Bottom line is club owes 1.5 billion. (Roman most likely would have recouped what he spent on us if he ever wanted to sell up)

Lord knows what happens to chelsea under the new lot and how much they'll sell for. i reather suspect we'll all be supporting Real CFC playing on Battersea Common at some point when the club moves to New York. Anyhow, thunderstorm stops play...
Click to expand...
But my point is that under Roman it was a subordinated loan to ourselves. Under Bruce Buck we were working towards the club becoming self sustaining. Of course we'll never know if this would have been achievable but with Roman's redesigned Stamford Bridge and the club owners trying to move away from collective bargaining from Sky it might have happened.

This mob have run up 20 years of debt in three years which is owed to external companies, and which was not how the original sale agreement was intended. Who was appointed to ensure that the terms of the sale agreement were adhered to? Abramovich can't sue, he is still sanctioned.

Yes there was self reporting, but again I think some of this was vanity grandstanding by Blueco. If you delved back ten years and looked at the accounts of most clubs I'll bet there are financial irregularities of some sort. If for no other reason than the required standards have evolved. Ironically where we did fall foul of the regs was for sweeteners for youngsters (that doesn't look a good phrase actually!). Was the Gael Kakuta deal the primary case?

 
But my point is that under Roman it was a subordinated loan to ourselves. Under Bruce Buck we were working towards the club becoming self sustaining. Of course we'll never know if this would have been achievable but with Roman's redesigned Stamford Bridge and the club owners trying to move away from collective bargaining from Sky it might have happened.

This mob have run up 20 years of debt in three years which is owed to external companies, and which was not how the original sale agreement was intended. Who was appointed to ensure that the terms of the sale agreement were adhered to? Abramovich can't sue, he is still sanctioned.

Yes there was self reporting, but again I think some of this was vanity grandstanding by Blueco. If you delved back ten years and looked at the accounts of most clubs I'll bet there are financial irregularities of some sort. If for no other reason than the required standards have evolved. Ironically where we did fall foul of the regs was for sweeteners for youngsters (that doesn't look a good phrase actually!). Was the Gael Kakuta deal the primary case?
Click to expand...
Argue around it all you want, the fact is we owe 1.5 billion. Doesnt matter if its to Roman or Florida mobsters.

Im genuinely struggling to think of any time under Roman CFC self sustaining. Just didnt happen. Lovely work of fiction though the club, like its new owners are trying to spin. SSDD.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top