What are your thoughts on our plans on building the team? At the moment it looks like we are identifying young talents and just buying them. Are those players fitting for the idea of football we are going for? Do we even have an idea of football in place? 

I know we should be happy seeing these lads come in but is it all part of a smart and sustainable plan..? 

Time will tell I guess....

I'm no economist, far from it, but this reminds me so much of how investors work with startups. They invest heavily in the first 2-3 years on an idea, making sure all the requirements to make it work are in place and with the best personel/equipment possible, and in the hope that in 3-4 years' time the company will start making benefits. Once it is working, their investment pays off. Of course, they run the risk that it may not work, but that's why the keep a close eye on it and if they feel like they need to improve here or there to make it work, they'll do it. If they feel that it is a lost cause, they'll close the tap.

We are still at the early stages. They've come in heavily, checked that they needed to change certain things in the club, including the players, and they are doing it by investing heavily to get everything in place for the Club to be successful in the next couple of years or so. Once we are back at the top challenging for titles regularly, their investment will be reduced to here and there as it is needed, and possibly it will be done with the money the Club makes. They've invested for the long term with young players that have potential to become very good and long term contracts, so I think they have long term plans.

54 minutes ago, RMH said:

They've invested for the long term with young players that have potential to become very good

What happens if they do not reach their potential?

13 minutes ago, Robertofthegiz said:

What happens if they do not reach their potential?

I don't know, but my guess is that heads will roll and so on. Investors are used to taking risks, any inversion is a risk, but they don't take this blindly, so they'll have done risk analyses. My expectation is that they know what they are doing with their money and the level of investment is related to the risk assessment they've done. If players don't work out, they'll cut losses, sell while there's value (they are young and can have some value to recoup as they can peak/improve elsewhere) and rethink the strategy.

I've not heard people question Man Utd's vision, Newcastle's vision, Tottenham's vision, Man City's vision, or Liverpool's vision. But when Chelsea start spending a lot of money to buy young and talented players for the future, all of a sudden the club's vision is questioned. Fair enough we've hired and fired managers in the past, but that was under Roman. We now have new owners who are serious about building the club into one of the biggest clubs in world football. They seem serious about the redevelopment of the stadium too. There are many things to be positive about for the future of CFC. I swear it's a weird agenda against American owners. 

34 minutes ago, enigma said:

I've not heard people question Man Utd's vision, Newcastle's vision, Tottenham's vision, Man City's vision, or Liverpool's vision. But when Chelsea start spending a lot of money to buy young and talented players for the future, all of a sudden the club's vision is questioned. Fair enough we've hired and fired managers in the past, but that was under Roman. We now have new owners who are serious about building the club into one of the biggest clubs in world football. They seem serious about the redevelopment of the stadium too. There are many things to be positive about for the future of CFC. I swear it's a weird agenda against American owners. 

I don't think it is an agenda against American owners. Arsenal, Utd and Liverpool have them and there's no such a cry out from the media against them. It is a Chelsea thing. They booted our Russian owner out of the country, they froze Chelsea amongst other assets from Abramovich, preventing the Club to function normally last season, and that was before Boehly and investors took over. They'd never dream of doing anything like that to any other top PL team. It doesn't matter who owns the Club, it is Chelsea that annoys them to no end. Let's keep doing our thing and pissing on them.

6 minutes ago, RMH said:

I don't think it is an agenda against American owners. Arsenal, Utd and Liverpool have them and there's no such a cry out from the media against them. It is a Chelsea thing. They booted our Russian owner out of the country, they froze Chelsea amongst other assets from Abramovich, preventing the Club to function normally last season, and that was before Boehly and investors took over. They'd never dream of doing anything like that to any other top PL team. It doesn't matter who owns the Club, it is Chelsea that annoys them to no end. Let's keep doing our thing and pissing on them.

It really does leave that impression, doesn't it.  We are disrupters and other clubs, authorities, associations and media just do not like that. 

On 28/01/2023 at 22:31, The Rising Sun said:

"When " these signings work out ?

 

We still have yet to see all of them together. The debuts have been good if not great but plenty of our signings had good debuts. 

Am I excited? Yes. Also a wee bit skeptical

5 hours ago, RMH said:

I'm no economist, far from it, but this reminds me so much of how investors work with startups. They invest heavily in the first 2-3 years on an idea, making sure all the requirements to make it work are in place and with the best personel/equipment possible, and in the hope that in 3-4 years' time the company will start making benefits. Once it is working, their investment pays off. Of course, they run the risk that it may not work, but that's why the keep a close eye on it and if they feel like they need to improve here or there to make it work, they'll do it. If they feel that it is a lost cause, they'll close the tap.

We are still at the early stages. They've come in heavily, checked that they needed to change certain things in the club, including the players, and they are doing it by investing heavily to get everything in place for the Club to be successful in the next couple of years or so. Once we are back at the top challenging for titles regularly, their investment will be reduced to here and there as it is needed, and possibly it will be done with the money the Club makes. They've invested for the long term with young players that have potential to become very good and long term contracts, so I think they have long term plans.

Investors have invested in us to make money . That's the whole purpose of them.

At some stage they will want a return on their billions

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

Investors have invested in us to make money . That's the whole purpose of them.

At some stage they will want a return on their billions

PL and Champions League revenue is expected to vastly increase year over year. They've no doubt forecasted this and considered it with regards to their investment into the side. 

3 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

Investors have invested in us to make money . That's the whole purpose of them.

At some stage they will want a return on their billions

 

 

 

 

Yes, but they would not have got into it and be investing this heavily if they thought that it was not possible. Making money from a football Club is as possible as making it from a baseball club or a music band; there needs to be clever investment and clear plans for a mid to long term. Also, Roman, as far as I know, introduced the famous 'anti-Glazers' clause in the sale contract by which they can't take out money from the Club (as in pay dividends and sell shares) for 10 years to avoid what the Glazers have done at ManU (this may not be true, who knows, but I think that it was reported and I thought it was an interesting insurance that Roman put in place for Chelsea). And he left the Club with a 0 balance having condoned the debt. So the money they're investing is what they had agreed to invest to start with, they'll stop paying big money once they think everything is in place for success. And with sport success comes comercial revenue. And, for me it's the biggest selling point, building a new stadium or renovating the Bridge can provide them with shed loads of money (many Club owners/presidents in Spain are in fact contructors, like Florentino Perez). We will see how it all ends, but I'm just not totally against them so far.

45 minutes ago, RMH said:

Yes, but they would not have got into it and be investing this heavily if they thought that it was not possible. Making money from a football Club is as possible as making it from a baseball club or a music band; there needs to be clever investment and clear plans for a mid to long term. Also, Roman, as far as I know, introduced the famous 'anti-Glazers' clause in the sale contract by which they can't take out money from the Club (as in pay dividends and sell shares) for 10 years to avoid what the Glazers have done at ManU (this may not be true, who knows, but I think that it was reported and I thought it was an interesting insurance that Roman put in place for Chelsea). And he left the Club with a 0 balance having condoned the debt. So the money they're investing is what they had agreed to invest to start with, they'll stop paying big money once they think everything is in place for success. And with sport success comes comercial revenue. And, for me it's the biggest selling point, building a new stadium or renovating the Bridge can provide them with shed loads of money (many Club owners/presidents in Spain are in fact contructors, like Florentino Perez). We will see how it all ends, but I'm just not totally against them so far.

Yes I agree mate. The safeguards in the contract definitely protect us, gotta thank Roman . 

I'm actually more confident about the future as time goes on ,  seems like we actually have a long term plan instead of a 2 season plan.

Take care

We are truly the Villians of world football and I f**king love it 🤣🤣😂

The mental gymnastics all the bias pundits are going through trying the make out a successful business man is playing football manager is hilarious!!

Remember these lot said we were going out of business and we are in danger of folding and the days of Roman spending is over 😂😂😂

All of them can get f**ked 🤣🤣 

Cry some more 😭😭😭

"Without Roman Chelsea are f**ked. HAHA couldn't happen to a nicer club" 

I wonder if they will bring back the old "once he get's bored, you're f**ked" comments 😆

It's funny watching rival fans get so upset about us all over again, especially after they were pushing for the government to take Chelsea from Abramovich and cheering for our demise. Be careful what you wish for.

21 minutes ago, El regreso said:

We are truly the Villians of world football and I f**king love it 🤣🤣😂

The mental gymnastics all the bias pundits are going through trying the make out a successful business man is playing football manager is hilarious!!

Remember these lot said we were going out of business and we are in danger of folding and the days of Roman spending is over 😂😂😂

All of them can get f**ked 🤣🤣 

Cry some more 😭😭😭

It's hilarious, all the glee when RA had to sell up now the spite because we are spending big as normal!! 😄😄😄😁😀

Random question. If someone wanted to buy CHO for 20m but didn't want to pay him 120k...well the shortfall in wages is barely anything in the grand scheme of things, 100k a week is 5m a year. 

Couldn't we just take some of that and pay off the difference?

How are wages always a blocker. 

Basically, it can't be that hard to shift our dead wood as most of them will still be worth 10-30m for a lot of clubs - especially in the PL

46 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Random question. If someone wanted to buy CHO for 20m but didn't want to pay him 120k...well the shortfall in wages is barely anything in the grand scheme of things, 100k a week is 5m a year. 

Couldn't we just take some of that and pay off the difference?

How are wages always a blocker. 

Basically, it can't be that hard to shift our dead wood as most of them will still be worth 10-30m for a lot of clubs - especially in the PL

Yes, good point. Perhaps we could do a sort of reverse release clause. Try to get a decent fee for the players and offer the player a release clause kickback to take a reduced wage from the buying club

 

Imagine 🤣

Jokes aside though apparently selling Gallagher for £40m would actually write of £280m in terms of financial fair play. Something to do with how the 7 year contracts work I presume and the loophole I suppose we found. 

 

 

10 hours ago, Robertofthegiz said:

What happens if they do not reach their potential?

It’s actually difficult to answer if you’re considering transfers as separate from the holistic model i.e does it really matter if the club becomes a lot more profitable. But also:

Take Mudryk - if in 3 years he doesn’t work out and we sold him for 30-40m, the balance on the books is pretty close to zero. On the flip side, we’ve signed a number of talents below market value (Fofana, Santos etc) a la Brighton as a counterweight. Those are your money makers that will offset the risk of the big signings. And that’s before even considering the amazing academy prospects.

So in essence there are two transfer strategies in play - the Brighton model (that will feed into the multiclub system) and the standard one reflecting the club’s ambition.

I just hope we can find buyers for the dozens of fringe players this summer. The club has always struggled with this

Honestly, this is a lot more fun than roughly 11 months ago when we were sanctioned.  Who would have thought we'd be having these conversations then.

I love the reaction from other fans and media.  Absolute disrupters and that is what it takes.  Still think we build this season and will have a large target on our back, but lets go!! 

It's always funny to look at the trends on Twitter when there is news on a big signing for us. When we signed Mudryk, I saw a combination of GlazersOut and Liverpool fans wanting their lot out. Today it's been GlazersOut. They aim their bitterness at us and then go back to crying about their owners 😆

11 minutes ago, PhilH930 said:

Honestly, this is a lot more fun than roughly 11 months ago when we were sanctioned.  Who would have thought we'd be having these conversations then.

I love the reaction from other fans and media.  Absolute disrupters and that is what it takes.  Still think we build this season and will have a large target on our back, but lets go!! 

I'm getting flashbacks to 2003. We just need the "Chelsea are killing football" headlines now.

this was mentioned earlier, but the YouTube panel including Behdad Eghbali is worth a watch. Don’t for one minute think these guys will get emotionally attacked to the club like Roman did (although I’m sure there is some Ryan Reynolds type opportunity). Simply put, the belief in Intellectual property value and how poorly monetized that is right now shows the upside.

Chelsea was their beachhead investment, and it starts by getting the content (on the pitch) side right. We’re on that journey. Worth a watch.