3 minutes ago, sonic90 said:

If the club transfers hands I don't think we'll get a better owner. Unless we get bought by a state like City/PSG. Hope this is all just a part of Roman's chess game.

It will probably be some Chinese Billionaire. I don't see any difference either way.

This is a standard part of project management, continued business justification. The business case is continually reviewed to ensure its aligned to the business objectives, at any point it can be stopped for review or totally cancelled. This can be down to anything from cost inflation in materials (and there's a f**k ton of material in this build) to a better alternative way of accomplishing those needs has been found. 

4 hours ago, General said:

He's got around the visa issue by becoming an Israeli citizen, he can enter the UK on a non-work visa anytime now, lets face it he aint looking to work like us lot, he just picks up the phone and tells his peeps what he wants- they do the work. So how can the home office prove he's working ? I would say its not the visa 'scaring' him off this project but whats potentially coming if the West's relations with the Kremlin sour even further, when push comes to shove hes gonna side with Putin, hence his new Tel Aviv bolthole.  Its a shame as this SB re development looked like a fantastic project, one I'd like to have got on, I'm on a 3 billion dollar one over here just starting up, so would have loved to try and blag my way on Roman's 'remodel' as a PM.

Oh god, I misread for a moment, thought you wrote "he's gonna side with Pulis".

We don't know how long the project is on-hold for. It could be 3 months, 1 year or 6 months. Don't see the reason to panic since there have been delays in getting approval from the council etc but there was no official announcement from the club back then so no one really payed much attention to the delays. This case may be more serious but still no need to overreact. It's not as if the project has been abandoned...... so the club still plan on continuing with it. Hence the word 'on-hold'. 

1 hour ago, sonic90 said:

If the club transfers hands I don't think we'll get a better owner. Unless we get bought by a state like City/PSG. Hope this is all just a part of Roman's chess game.

Uncle Ken has offered a quid for us.

There might well have been a delay anyway given the new plans to purchase land from Oswold Stoll which *could* have required an amended, additional Planning Application being submitted.

Seems a little coincidental with regards to his visa rejection timing.

Not a big fan of him using the club's future as a political pawn.

I became a loyal blue in 1980 - at that time we were playing in the 2nd division, having financial problems, lots of trouble in the stands and a second choice stadium.

Even if we´d fall back to those times, I´d still be a loyal supporter, with RA, or without RA, with a new Stamford Bridge, or without, with big financial problems, or without, with worldclass players, or without, with a worldclass manager, or without.

Whatever will happen, we can´t change anything and we know very little about whats going on among the big shots. Lets keep our fingers crossed, that this episode will vanish as fast, as it has come.

Blue is the future; it was in 1980 and it is now.

2 hours ago, charierre said:

Uncle Ken has offered a quid for us.

Bring back Bates, re-erect the fence!!!!

31 minutes ago, nominator said:

I became a loyal blue in 1980 - at that time we were playing in the 2nd division, having financial problems, lots of trouble in the stands and a second choice stadium.

Even if we´d fall back to those times, I´d still be a loyal supporter, with RA, or without RA, with a new Stamford Bridge, or without, with big financial problems, or without, with worldclass players, or without, with a worldclass manager, or without.

Whatever will happen, we can´t change anything and we know very little about whats going on among the big shots. Lets keep our fingers crossed, that this episode will vanish as fast, as it has come.

Blue is the future; it was in 1980 and it is now.

Agreed. Well said.

Roman is a big part of our success,  but to be honest we are now the 8th wealthiest club in Europe purely on the back of what we make on our own. We're an established worldwide brand with massive sponsorship.

I wrote some time ago that the stadium would struggle to return it's investment anytime soon. Its a billion dollar investment that might return 50m extra max each season. Keep in mind we make the same amount of revenue from our stadium as Man City do. The key difference is in their increased sponsorship. We've hired Chris Townsend to work at that aspect and we will see if we can start to close gaps that way. 

The stadium may be put on hold until Roman's visa is sorted or it may be shelved for good, but the key is in smart management at the club to make the best use of what we have. Wasting 200m in the transfer market last season is an example of what not to do. 

We need a new Director of Football installed, a philosophy that guides our style implemented from top to bottom at the club and then managers and players installed who fit that style. 

That would save money, bring us success and drive sponsorship dollars that would easily accomodate for the stadium.

1 hour ago, Fatty_Speeding said:

Seems a little coincidental with regards to his visa rejection timing.

Not a big fan of him using the club's future as a political pawn.

Likely what it is isn't it? Why sink around a billion pounds into a project if you aren't sure you can even get a Visa? 

45 minutes ago, Spiller86 said:

Agreed. Well said.

Roman is a big part of our success,  but to be honest we are now the 8th wealthiest club in Europe purely on the back of what we make on our own. We're an established worldwide brand with massive sponsorship.

I wrote some time ago that the stadium would struggle to return it's investment anytime soon. Its a billion dollar investment that might return 50m extra max each season. Keep in mind we make the same amount of revenue from our stadium as Man City do. The key difference is in their increased sponsorship. We've hired Chris Townsend to work at that aspect and we will see if we can start to close gaps that way. 

The stadium may be put on hold until Roman's visa is sorted or it may be shelved for good, but the key is in smart management at the club to make the best use of what we have. Wasting 200m in the transfer market last season is an example of what not to do. 

We need a new Director of Football installed, a philosophy that guides our style implemented from top to bottom at the club and then managers and players installed who fit that style. 

That would save money, bring us success and drive sponsorship dollars that would easily accomodate for the stadium.

The new stadium would secure us a much bigger revenue each season that was the point of the whole thing in the first place, cause if we earn more our status with the FFP rules would also get better and we wouldn't worry about spending big in the future. Arsenal got a new stadium, Spuds are getting it too, I'm with you mate I don't mind if we never move from where the club is now but there would be a lot of positive stuff with a new stadium.

Someone tell me if I should be worrying about the future of the club. 

f**king terrible news. Let’s hope this is just a negotiating tactic from Roman to the government.

No matter what happens though, Chels till I die. If that means playing Derby and Sheff Utd in future seasons, so be it.

Those people hoping we get taken over by a Country like Man City have might get their wish if the UK Government decides to seize Abramovich's assets! 

8 hours ago, TomCFC85 said:

Mate, I don't know about you but I'd prefer World Class players instead of Jonathan Collins-Monroe Jr the Third any day. 

we are two years or so away from losing all the European players who will then be classed as foreign instead of homegrown. we will then be down to three foreign players per team as premier league rules require 8 homegrown. but hey lets not let brexit get in the way of a good story :D

18 minutes ago, Unclezillion said:

we are two years or so away from losing all the European players who will then be classed as foreign instead of homegrown. we will then be down to three foreign players per team as premier league rules require 8 homegrown. but hey lets not let brexit get in the way of a good story :D

Premier league requires 8 home grown players in a squad of maximum 25 players over the age of 21. To class as home grown you have to have trained in england/Wales for 3 years prior to age 21 irrespective of nationality.

Edited June 1, 20188 yr by PedroMendez

1 hour ago, PedroMendez said:

Premier league requires 8 home grown players in a squad of maximum 25 players over the age of 21. To class as home grown you have to have trained in england/Wales for 3 years prior to age 21 irrespective of nationality.

Chelsea's website only has the 8 as Fab qualifies as homegrown. post brexit is still up for grabs and being discussed  with the govt

14 hours ago, evissy said:

Roman is playing hardball with the county. He is interested in investing 1bn to the country but due to his ties to Putin and Russia (that allegedly poisoned that russian man and his daughter) + brexit climate his visa is not being renewed. I think 1bn is a factor and Britain will give him his visa. 

I really detest what Putins government is doing if the reports are true so I really can't blame Britain here although I want things to go well with Chelsea. For me Roman has shown he is worthy of his visa. 

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Governments don't like having guns held to their head. If they roll over and and speedily issue Roman his visa it might make them appear weak.

Im not sure how this will unravel.

9 hours ago, Fatty_Speeding said:

Not a big fan of him using the club's future as a political pawn.

I agree that the timing of this news was inappropriate, but if has problems entering the country now (and chances are high that this may be a recurrent problem in the future), there's no point gambling 1 billion on a project that won't see immediate returns. A new stadium doesn't pay itself out in just a few years and 1 billion investment does NOT increase the club's value by 1 billion, if he were to sell the club sometime in the next few years. 

I don't agree that he's using the club as a political pawn. From a purely business point of view, not risking another 1 billion is the correct move from a purely business move given the current political stalemate. Any other sane businessman would have done the same thing. And whatever philanthropic view on CFC he may have had, has taken a big hit with the visa issue.

Yes, the timing of the announcement was wrong. 

7 hours ago, TomCFC85 said:

Someone tell me if I should be worrying about the future of the club. 

No, if you were around in the late 70's early 80's then you should of worried

1 hour ago, Lord said:

I agree that the timing of this news was inappropriate, but if has problems entering the country now (and chances are high that this may be a recurrent problem in the future), there's no point gambling 1 billion on a project that won't see immediate returns. A new stadium doesn't pay itself out in just a few years and 1 billion investment does NOT increase the club's value by 1 billion, if he were to sell the club sometime in the next few years. 

I don't agree that he's using the club as a political pawn. From a purely business point of view, not risking another 1 billion is the correct move from a purely business move given the current political stalemate. Any other sane businessman would have done the same thing. And whatever philanthropic view on CFC he may have had, has taken a big hit with the visa issue.

Yes, the timing of the announcement was wrong. 

so interest rates are at the lowest for years and the product is considered the best available yet these are unfavorable conditions! yeah pull the other one!

2 minutes ago, Unclezillion said:

so interest rates are at the lowest for years and the product is considered the best available yet these are unfavorable conditions! yeah pull the other one!

I find not being granted entry into the country you are investing in a very unfavorable condition.

14 hours ago, dkw said:

This is a standard part of project management, continued business justification. The business case is continually reviewed to ensure its aligned to the business objectives, at any point it can be stopped for review or totally cancelled. This can be down to anything from cost inflation in materials (and there's a f**k ton of material in this build) to a better alternative way of accomplishing those needs has been found. 

f**king rational thought again!  Sheesh!

Should've just pushed the move to Battersea through a couple of years ago. Redeveloping SB is too much of a ballache anyway.