https://twitter.com/CFCPys/status/1765699766078333262?t=p6YpJX7pHsHQAZuO2_y-sA&s=19

1 hour ago, evissy said:

I listened to Big Pete as well. What a brilliant man that is. His analogy was good as well.

Thing is..we haven't seen one club in world football do what we did with complete squad overhaul. No one in media, management or footballing staff have seen a top club do this. This is the first. 

I agree what Pete said about passengers and drivers. Makes a ton of sense. 

What I don't connect is why can't our plan work? I know the risk is higher when we essentially have dropped the children in the deep end of the pool. However if the lads react well under a good coach like Pochettino they can be the drivers in the near future having all the experience smacked to their face without easing them in. 

It is naturally more risky BUT if the plan works we have built a spine for our squad with young players. Young players are much easier to mould than experienced ones. And when you mould the stability in managers/coaches come much more essential. This is why I don't want us to hesitate with Pochettino. 

And we will adjust the squad every window. Maybe we buy one experienced player in the next window that matches the squad. Maybe Enzo takes a big step to lead the team. Maybe James is injury free and takes the lead. Maybe Nkunku is healthy and leads the front line. 

What is so hard for us fans is to wait for all this to happen. We can be selfish of course but I'd adjust expectations and enjoy the kids grow.

I think there is a world where our plan does work, but I don't think its just a case of needing the fans to wait and let it happen. 

We've spent huge, gone almost all in (in terms of ffp) on a group of younger players that could end up succeeeding, but aslo could not. So there is a ticking clock in terms of finances, we'll need to be achieving more than we currently are long term to keep covering book costs and potentially further upgrading costs. This will relate to prize money as well as sponsorships. We've supposedly addressed some wage bill issues which is a positive, but our lovely 8 year contracts for half our squad means that year to year we are already tied up largely FFP wise.

We also have a group of successful buys, within the current number of dissapointments, that aren't going to wait years for us to sort it out. Palmer for exampe, if we are still in the abyss in 2/3 years, will likely be looking to take the next step. Fernandez, Nkunku etc, arent just going to wait around forever for us to sort ourselves out. This would be hard to take, given that if we are still in the abyss in 2/3 years then theyre likely part of the problem, but football often doesnt work that way and there would be plenty of suitors for them at a cut price.

If this phase doesn't end successfully, then we enter the realms of Liverpool pre Klopp, United Post Fergie, where we are going to need a huge effort to be considered a title contender, top top English side. Where we start again, probably not being able to draw top top talents but having to be much more strategic and build our way up again. Which would likely feel the same as this now, but with less money spent.

So I agree with you in general, our plan can work, it still might. But these types of projects are normally made easier to palate when there are a group of established players, capable of keeping it ticking over whilst the new group are blooded in. A long term project used to mean settling for a few years challenging for top 4, not top half.

“They have also announced Chelsea made a loss of £90.1m for the period up to June 30 2023“

From Matt Law. 
 

Not entirely sure what it means. 

Chelsea 2022/23 Financial Results: “For the first time in the group’s history, the turnover figure has broken the £500m barrier, growing from £481.3m the previous year to £512.5m for 2022/23.” (via @ChelseaFC)💙

Chelsea grew overall revenue from £481.3m to £512.5m, made profits on disposal of player registrations and fixed assets of £142.2m, and had increases in other income.

Chelsea also increased commercial revenue from £33.0m to £210.1m. [@JacobsBen]

10 minutes ago, Niall1905 said:

I think there is a world where our plan does work, but I don't think its just a case of needing the fans to wait and let it happen. 

We've spent huge, gone almost all in (in terms of ffp) on a group of younger players that could end up succeeeding, but aslo could not.

I think we can say with all certainty that the plan has completely failed. We finished mid table and trophyless last season and will do the same this season. Haven't seen that at Chelsea since the mid 90s.

Also absolutely certain this wouldn't have been the target - we'd have planned on continued CL qualification.

2 hours ago, JM7 said:

Seen the tweets about Mount sale being included in the previous account reporting so therefore, we will need alot of player sales in the summer. Now we know why Conor isn’t getting a new contract. 
 

The club are playing a risky strategy as clubs don’t seem to be spending as much on transfers. Big risk. 

If that is the case that suggests the whole June 30th deadline isn't entirely accurate, considering we sold Mount in July?

9 minutes ago, JM7 said:

Chelsea grew overall revenue from £481.3m to £512.5m, made profits on disposal of player registrations and fixed assets of £142.2m, and had increases in other income.

Chelsea also increased commercial revenue from £33.0m to £210.1m. [@JacobsBen]

Great. Now let's see success on the pitch. 

33 minutes ago, Niall1905 said:

I think there is a world where our plan does work, but I don't think its just a case of needing the fans to wait and let it happen. 

We've spent huge, gone almost all in (in terms of ffp) on a group of younger players that could end up succeeeding, but aslo could not. So there is a ticking clock in terms of finances, we'll need to be achieving more than we currently are long term to keep covering book costs and potentially further upgrading costs. This will relate to prize money as well as sponsorships. We've supposedly addressed some wage bill issues which is a positive, but our lovely 8 year contracts for half our squad means that year to year we are already tied up largely FFP wise.

We also have a group of successful buys, within the current number of dissapointments, that aren't going to wait years for us to sort it out. Palmer for exampe, if we are still in the abyss in 2/3 years, will likely be looking to take the next step. Fernandez, Nkunku etc, arent just going to wait around forever for us to sort ourselves out. This would be hard to take, given that if we are still in the abyss in 2/3 years then theyre likely part of the problem, but football often doesnt work that way and there would be plenty of suitors for them at a cut price.

If this phase doesn't end successfully, then we enter the realms of Liverpool pre Klopp, United Post Fergie, where we are going to need a huge effort to be considered a title contender, top top English side. Where we start again, probably not being able to draw top top talents but having to be much more strategic and build our way up again. Which would likely feel the same as this now, but with less money spent.

So I agree with you in general, our plan can work, it still might. But these types of projects are normally made easier to palate when there are a group of established players, capable of keeping it ticking over whilst the new group are blooded in. A long term project used to mean settling for a few years challenging for top 4, not top half.

So what we can do as fans is to do everything we can to make this plan work. That means going to matches buying TV-stream services, buy Merch, try to get people into watching Chelsea and most of all cheer the boys on. Nothing else decided by the owners is in our reach of affect. 

2 hours ago, JM7 said:

Chelsea grew overall revenue from £481.3m to £512.5m, made profits on disposal of player registrations and fixed assets of £142.2m, and had increases in other income.

Chelsea also increased commercial revenue from £33.0m to £210.1m. [@JacobsBen]

Shiiitt, how expensive was it to rent that bed in the stands ?!?!

Don't think Todd and his crew could use this one.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13168047/Leicester-loophole-football-spending-rules-Premier-League-EFL-club.html

I think the days of us spending ridiculous amounts is finally over now with the PSR fully in place. Ornstein and Romano essentially ruled us out for Osimhen and Nico Williams given the price and wages. 

 

10 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

I think the days of us spending ridiculous amounts is finally over now with the PSR fully in place. Ornstein and Romano essentially ruled us out for Osimhen and Nico Williams given the price and wages. 

 

This will be the norm for some time to come i reckon. Shopping in Aldi from now on

14 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

This will be the norm for some time to come i reckon. Shopping in Aldi from now on

We've been mostly shopping in Aldi since the new owners came in. We've just ended up paying Harrods prices.

I imagine most of our negotiations start with agents phoning us saying "Mr Boehly very good price only for you my friend"

5 minutes ago, Whats_The_Mata? said:

We've been mostly shopping in Aldi since the new owners came in. We've just ended up paying Harrods prices.

I imagine most of our negotiations start with agents phoning us saying "Mr Boehly very good price only for you my friend"

And Boehly's like

Bloody nice bloke

 

7 hours ago, JM7 said:

Chelsea grew overall revenue from £481.3m to £512.5m, made profits on disposal of player registrations and fixed assets of £142.2m, and had increases in other income.

Chelsea also increased commercial revenue from £33.0m to £210.1m. [@JacobsBen]

From 33 to 210? 

Edited March 7, 20242 yr by Gol15

11 hours ago, JM7 said:

“They have also announced Chelsea made a loss of £90.1m for the period up to June 30 2023“

From Matt Law. 
 

Not entirely sure what it means. 

That loss would have been reported to the Premier League for PSR compliance. If clubs make a total loss of more than 105m over a 3 year period, they are eligible for penalties e.g. points deductions. Forest and Everton (again) have been charged in this respect for the 3 year period ending with June 30 2023. I assume we must have complied over the same period, or we would have been mentioned as one of the clubs charged.   Not quite sure how as I think our reported loss for season 2021-22 was something like 125m, but perhaps it had something to do with pandemic allowances for the year before that. Either way, I assume we will now have to report a profit of about 110m for the period ending June 30 2024 if we want to fall under the 105m margin. I imagine that explains the speculation over possibly having to sell players for 100% profit (academy trained) by end of June. Owners supposedly claim they are fine in this respect but some of that may be to avoid a situation where clubs lowball us for players. We will know the truth in the months ahead.

One thing is pretty clear though. With these new PSR rules, aligned with the amortized costs of Clearlake's spending the last 2 years, I suspect new signings to be very limited the next couple of years. We will have to hope that the signings to date mostly work out.

6 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

I think the days of us spending ridiculous amounts is finally over now with the PSR fully in place. Ornstein and Romano essentially ruled us out for Osimhen and Nico Williams given the price and wages. 

 

This has to be one of the biggest f**k ups in modern day football ownership. Took a team amongst the top of the football pyramid to mid table sh*te, full of way overpriced, broken, mediocre footballers, coached by bang average (at best) managers. And because of all of this, we can no longer even afford to buy top players going forward.

Edited March 8, 20242 yr by Scott Harris

Nothing new here. Basically we are in real danger of getting into troubles off the field. Another round of 'pure profits' sale coming up, the pressure is on us to sell and sell quick, the potential buyers aren't in a hurry. Maybe we will generate 100M out of Gallagher, Chalobah and Broja, if there are enough ' stupid' buyers out there. Balance the finance, then use whatever left to buy youngsters. We will probably do this again June 2025, I'm thinking Colwill, James etc on sale.

28 minutes ago, icecoolguy22 said:

Nothing new here. Basically we are in real danger of getting into troubles off the field. Another round of 'pure profits' sale coming up, the pressure is on us to sell and sell quick, the potential buyers aren't in a hurry. Maybe we will generate 100M out of Gallagher, Chalobah and Broja, if there are enough ' stupid' buyers out there. Balance the finance, then use whatever left to buy youngsters. We will probably do this again June 2025, I'm thinking Colwill, James etc on sale.

I could be wrong, but based on the PSR cutoff dates I think that the sales of Mount, Ampadu, Pulisic, and Hudson-Odoi would fall under 2023-24 season. Pulisic was probably a wash based on amortized values but the other 3 would be classed as 100% profit. So optimistically we may have already generated about 65m in sales for 2023-24.? The amortized category of signings spreads out the costs over several years. But even allowing for that we will probably be taking a hit of 100-200m per year for the foreseeable future thanks to Clearlake's transfer strategy. Without additional funds for European football etc. we will likely have to sell homegrown players every summer and/or forego further signings. I would certainly be surprised if we make any substantial signings this summer unless we offload some academy-trained players for decent numbers first.

I would agree that we will try to sell both Chalobah and Broja. Although it is unclear how much we will get for either player. I suspect Gallagher will be offloaded as he would likely command a decent fee. Although that seems to be a risky move given his popularity much of the base, aligned with the fact that most of our alternative midfield options are continually injured.

There are also suggestions that Newcastle may avoid making Hall into a permanent signing as he has yet to fulfil the certain threshold number of Premier League minutes that would make the deal mandatory. While he could yet be a valuable member of our squad if that occurs, the owners may have been banking on this fee as part of compliance so that could affect things too.

 

2 hours ago, forbzy said:

I could be wrong, but based on the PSR cutoff dates I think that the sales of Mount, Ampadu, Pulisic, and Hudson-Odoi would fall under 2023-24 season. Pulisic was probably a wash based on amortized values but the other 3 would be classed as 100% profit. So optimistically we may have already generated about 65m in sales for 2023-24.? The amortized category of signings spreads out the costs over several years. But even allowing for that we will probably be taking a hit of 100-200m per year for the foreseeable future thanks to Clearlake's transfer strategy. Without additional funds for European football etc. we will likely have to sell homegrown players every summer and/or forego further signings. I would certainly be surprised if we make any substantial signings this summer unless we offload some academy-trained players for decent numbers first.

I would agree that we will try to sell both Chalobah and Broja. Although it is unclear how much we will get for either player. I suspect Gallagher will be offloaded as he would likely command a decent fee. Although that seems to be a risky move given his popularity much of the base, aligned with the fact that most of our alternative midfield options are continually injured.

There are also suggestions that Newcastle may avoid making Hall into a permanent signing as he has yet to fulfil the certain threshold number of Premier League minutes that would make the deal mandatory. While he could yet be a valuable member of our squad if that occurs, the owners may have been banking on this fee as part of compliance so that could affect things too.

 

Id happily take hall back and sell 2 of maatsen/cucu/chillwell

I think Gallagher's fate might be sealed if we need to gain 100m in the summer. 

However we probably have to wait before we go doom and gloom. 

City for example have done pretty well dodging bullets. I would think we have an army of people making sure we do too.

13 hours ago, forbzy said:

That loss would have been reported to the Premier League for PSR compliance. If clubs make a total loss of more than 105m over a 3 year period, they are eligible for penalties e.g. points deductions. Forest and Everton (again) have been charged in this respect for the 3 year period ending with June 30 2023. I assume we must have complied over the same period, or we would have been mentioned as one of the clubs charged.   Not quite sure how as I think our reported loss for season 2021-22 was something like 125m, but perhaps it had something to do with pandemic allowances for the year before that. Either way, I assume we will now have to report a profit of about 110m for the period ending June 30 2024 if we want to fall under the 105m margin. I imagine that explains the speculation over possibly having to sell players for 100% profit (academy trained) by end of June. Owners supposedly claim they are fine in this respect but some of that may be to avoid a situation where clubs lowball us for players. We will know the truth in the months ahead.

One thing is pretty clear though. With these new PSR rules, aligned with the amortized costs of Clearlake's spending the last 2 years, I suspect new signings to be very limited the next couple of years. We will have to hope that the signings to date mostly work out.

We are also running out of pure profit kids to sell off

2 hours ago, evissy said:

I think Gallagher's fate might be sealed if we need to gain 100m in the summer. 

However we probably have to wait before we go doom and gloom. 

City for example have done pretty well dodging bullets. I would think we have an army of people making sure we do too.

Unless he says no of course, and waits until the end of his deal. Let's be honest he's only one Wesley Fofana injury away from the end of his deal anyway.

Edited March 8, 20242 yr by WhiteWall

Can someone explain…you can make £105m loss per season for 3 years? Or is it a £105m across the 3 years? I.e it is totalled upto a maximum of £105m