6 hours ago, axman2526 said:

While I don't have faith in the owners to build us back in to a top football team, nevermind about elite one, I also very much believe in their ability to both handle finances and make money.

We are an asset to Clearlake, they are worth billions and answer to their investors. One way or another they will make money for their investors of Chelsea FC. I am sure of that.

This is an incredibly naive belief.

Modern hedge funds, and their managers, created wealth by disrupting the previous investment paradigm of seeking profit-making enterprises and instead investing into enterprises with extremely fast growth (ie the tech sector) that outpaced legal regulation. The idea is to grow a company's value by any means and investment necessary, including ignoring rules and regulations until they are enforced, then selling the company in an IPO or to a new owner. Ten years on, few of the stocks that built these wealth empires are actually profitable, and so the new owner is more often than not left 'holding the bag' in what is essentially glorified pyramid scheme tactics.

Boehly and co are clearly thinking there is an opportunity to apply this investment strategy to football and a lot of that is based on their own naivety/arrogance because they don't understand the game, and haven't had the time to actually surround and educate themselves with people that do.  The 'blitzscaling' strategy was only ever viable in a low-interest financial environment where new technologies were yet to be regulated.  Hedge funds can no longer rely on these once-in-a-blue-moon investments. BlueCo has invested in football during a period of increased interest rates, high inflation and a heavily-regulated football environment with huge appetite to enforce rules against clubs not 'on the inside' - the veritable opposite of the conditions that caused Clearlake's wealth in the first place.

There is a very real and likely risk that football is at the peak of its commercial potential, not as untapped as Boehly and BlueCo claim, and the people they sell to eventually will be the ones 'holding the bag', almost certainly consigning the club to mediocrity.

The only silver lining is the exploding commercial potential of womens' football, which can and should become its own multi-billion dollar sector in the next World Cup cycle. We are a club uniquely poised to take advantage of those riches if we can win the UWCL before another English club and continue investing heavily in the women's team, cementing Chelsea as a commericial behemoth of the women's game much as Manchester United did in the mens game post-1999.

I'll be honest, I think it's the only way that BlueCo can save this club and their project.

Edited December 13, 20232 yr by SydneyChelsea

32 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

This is an incredibly naive belief.

Modern hedge funds, and their managers, created wealth by disrupting the previous investment paradigm of seeking profit-making enterprises and instead investing into enterprises with extremely fast growth (ie the tech sector) that outpaced legal regulation. The idea is to grow a company's value by any means and investment necessary, including ignoring rules and regulations until they are enforced, then selling the company in an IPO or to a new owner. Ten years on, few of the stocks that built these wealth empires are actually profitable, and so the new owner is more often than not left 'holding the bag' in what is essentially glorified pyramid scheme tactics.

Boehly and co are clearly thinking there is an opportunity to apply this investment strategy to football and a lot of that is based on their own naivety/arrogance because they don't understand the game, and haven't had the time to actually surround and educate themselves with people that do.  The 'blitzscaling' strategy was only ever viable in a low-interest financial environment where new technologies were yet to be regulated.  Hedge funds can no longer rely on these once-in-a-blue-moon investments. BlueCo has invested in football during a period of increased interest rates, high inflation and a heavily-regulated football environment with huge appetite to enforce rules against clubs not 'on the inside' - the veritable opposite of the conditions that caused Clearlake's wealth in the first place.

There is a very real and likely risk that football is at the peak of its commercial potential, not as untapped as Boehly and BlueCo claim, and the people they sell to eventually will be the ones 'holding the bag', almost certainly consigning the club to mediocrity.

The only silver lining is the exploding commercial potential of womens' football, which can and should become its own multi-billion dollar sector in the next World Cup cycle. We are a club uniquely poised to take advantage of those riches if we can win the UWCL before another English club and continue investing heavily in the women's team, cementing Chelsea as a commericial behemoth of the women's game much as Manchester United did in the mens game post-1999.

I'll be honest, I think it's the only way that BlueCo can save this club and their project.

Interesting. Thanks for that. Let's wait and see what happens.

If they do end up killing the club, would sure make you wonder how they passes that for and proper owners tests wouldn't it.

36 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Interesting. Thanks for that. Let's wait and see what happens.

If they do end up killing the club, would sure make you wonder how they passes that for and proper owners tests wouldn't it.

Not really, as those 'tests' are scarcely worth the paper they are written on. They are very basic as they only require:

• The person not to have a direct or indirect conflict-of-interest with another English club
• The person to be solvent and reasonably capable of producing the funds to run the club
• The person not to have any criminal convictions or relevant corruption/fraud offences

Even still, the EPL has limited ability to actually investigate the above (see PIF/Clearlake). There is no test to assess the capability, plans or strategy of a prospective owner, or their general character and aims for the club. In practice, the 'test' essentially exists to ensure that only people politically favourable are permitted to own a club.

As much as I miss Roman and the good times of 'buying our way out of transfer mistakes', let's be honest. He left the club with a lavish trophy haul but in a terrible state. The transfers we made after the ban were full of duds that managed a great cup run. The signings of Kepa, Ziyech, Werner, Lukaku and Havertz should have been our attacking threat for the next 5 years or so had they lived up to their potential. They didn't and the new owners replaced them with even worse players which I didn't think would be possible given the money spent. This club has been run very badly in the transfer market since 2016.

1 hour ago, KonaKai Blue said:

As much as I miss Roman and the good times of 'buying our way out of transfer mistakes', let's be honest. He left the club with a lavish trophy haul but in a terrible state. The transfers we made after the ban were full of duds that managed a great cup run. The signings of Kepa, Ziyech, Werner, Lukaku and Havertz should have been our attacking threat for the next 5 years or so had they lived up to their potential. They didn't and the new owners replaced them with even worse players which I didn't think would be possible given the money spent. This club has been run very badly in the transfer market since 2016.

He left the club how he left it but make no mistake his final season at the club was a good one and he did leave the club in a good state.

Roman had a lot of good ideas and good moves, much more than bad ones and he was able to see in which direction football was being developed but he couldn't make Conte a less chaotic person and he couldn't persuade Sarri to stay either.

But while at the end of the road Roman did get to see quite a lot of academy players raising their level to the first team and he did show full support to Tuchel, we did try to go after Haaland and when it was obviously not possible Roman did approve Lukaku as Tuchel's second best wish and many others.

Let's face it that last full season we could have won so much, but due to injuries we lost a lot of steam for the league title run that year.

That last season under Roman we ended up as a top 3 team despite all the injuries, played in all Cup Finals and reached the CL quater-finals where we got knocked out by the winner of that year;

Roman didn't really get the chance to fix things, he only had the chance to save the club and that's what he did. 

Edited December 14, 20232 yr by Gol15

4 hours ago, KonaKai Blue said:

As much as I miss Roman and the good times of 'buying our way out of transfer mistakes', let's be honest. He left the club with a lavish trophy haul but in a terrible state. The transfers we made after the ban were full of duds that managed a great cup run. The signings of Kepa, Ziyech, Werner, Lukaku and Havertz should have been our attacking threat for the next 5 years or so had they lived up to their potential. They didn't and the new owners replaced them with even worse players which I didn't think would be possible given the money spent. This club has been run very badly in the transfer market since 2016.

He left the club as the only club in the PL debt free. This mob had a clean slate and a CL winning side. 

God sake, people still blaming Roman for everything happened after his unfortunate departure. Yes, he could have done better by having a perfect team setup to win titles for the next decade, but Boehly and his crew would sell it for a profit and replace them with a bunch of expensive wonder kids. We were a solid top 4 team with no debt, WTF more  could one ask?

8 hours ago, KonaKai Blue said:

As much as I miss Roman and the good times of 'buying our way out of transfer mistakes', let's be honest. He left the club with a lavish trophy haul but in a terrible state. The transfers we made after the ban were full of duds that managed a great cup run. The signings of Kepa, Ziyech, Werner, Lukaku and Havertz should have been our attacking threat for the next 5 years or so had they lived up to their potential. They didn't and the new owners replaced them with even worse players which I didn't think would be possible given the money spent. This club has been run very badly in the transfer market since 2016.

Except he didn't leave the club, he was forced out. He didn't choose the timing and a manner of his exit. Football is full of scummy owners, that use their clubs for profit only and sell to the highest bidder without giving a solitary sh*t about the club's future. For all his faults, Roman wasn't one of those, he genuinely cared about Chelsea.

He made his share of mistakes, including some well documented and questionable moves on the transfer market and apparently some under the table deals with agents to bypass FFP, but he also bankrolled the most successful period in the club history.

 

Edited December 14, 20232 yr by abramovich

12 hours ago, abramovich said:

Except he didn't leave the club, he was forced out. He didn't choose the timing and a manner of his exit. Football is full of scummy owners, that use their clubs for profit only and sell to the highest bidder without giving a solitary sh*t about the club's future. For all his faults, Roman wasn't one of those, he genuinely cared about Chelsea.

He made his share of mistakes, including some well documented and questionable moves on the transfer market and apparently some under the table deals with agents to bypass FFP, but he also bankrolled the most successful period in the club history.

 

And here is the problem with FFP, as a few of us pointed out way back in 2006. It removed owners who were in it for reputational gain, and replaced them with owners who solely have a profit-motive. The insolvent, uncompetitive, multi-club mess that world football is currently mired in is a direct result of FFP.

1 hour ago, SydneyChelsea said:

And here is the problem with FFP, as a few of us pointed out way back in 2006. It removed owners who were in it for reputational gain, and replaced them with owners who solely have a profit-motive. The insolvent, uncompetitive, multi-club mess that world football is currently mired in is a direct result of FFP.

Great point. The idea in theory was to protect against disastrous owners like what happened at Portsmouth, but it penalized generous owners who were happy to invest their own money for the love of the game.

23 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

This is an incredibly naive belief.

Modern hedge funds, and their managers, created wealth by disrupting the previous investment paradigm of seeking profit-making enterprises and instead investing into enterprises with extremely fast growth (ie the tech sector) that outpaced legal regulation. The idea is to grow a company's value by any means and investment necessary, including ignoring rules and regulations until they are enforced, then selling the company in an IPO or to a new owner. Ten years on, few of the stocks that built these wealth empires are actually profitable, and so the new owner is more often than not left 'holding the bag' in what is essentially glorified pyramid scheme tactics.

Boehly and co are clearly thinking there is an opportunity to apply this investment strategy to football and a lot of that is based on their own naivety/arrogance because they don't understand the game, and haven't had the time to actually surround and educate themselves with people that do.  The 'blitzscaling' strategy was only ever viable in a low-interest financial environment where new technologies were yet to be regulated.  Hedge funds can no longer rely on these once-in-a-blue-moon investments. BlueCo has invested in football during a period of increased interest rates, high inflation and a heavily-regulated football environment with huge appetite to enforce rules against clubs not 'on the inside' - the veritable opposite of the conditions that caused Clearlake's wealth in the first place.

There is a very real and likely risk that football is at the peak of its commercial potential, not as untapped as Boehly and BlueCo claim, and the people they sell to eventually will be the ones 'holding the bag', almost certainly consigning the club to mediocrity.

The only silver lining is the exploding commercial potential of womens' football, which can and should become its own multi-billion dollar sector in the next World Cup cycle. We are a club uniquely poised to take advantage of those riches if we can win the UWCL before another English club and continue investing heavily in the women's team, cementing Chelsea as a commericial behemoth of the women's game much as Manchester United did in the mens game post-1999.

I'll be honest, I think it's the only way that BlueCo can save this club and their project.

Good points made. I think the women's game is likely to expand massively in the years ahead, and Chelsea have one of the best women's teams in the world. The men's game has arguably already peaked in popularity. There is much less obvious room for further growth.

Clearlake's approach seems to be more about investing in young players as assets that can be sold on for profit or loaned out for substantial fees. You could make a case that this model can be successful if the players are mostly well selected. However, with new rules there will be significant limits on how many players we can send out on loan, leaving the potential for a bloated squad full of inexperience. There needs to be some balance in their approach.

For me, FFP is there to protect the 'elite and heritage' clubs. Barca was so much in debt and FFP didn't do a thing, they were still signing players beyond their budget. Meanwhile, a 'hobby' club like us ( under Roman) was severely restricted because we were not working as a business. Mind you, we were never in serious debt like Barca. Poorer clubs are still going under, and domestic leagues and CL are still contested by the usual suspects, so WTF did FFP improve? Boehly and his crews obviously studied FFP, pity they didn't understand the round football game.

2 hours ago, forbzy said:

Good points made. I think the women's game is likely to expand massively in the years ahead, and Chelsea have one of the best women's teams in the world. The men's game has arguably already peaked in popularity. There is much less obvious room for further growth.

Clearlake's approach seems to be more about investing in young players as assets that can be sold on for profit or loaned out for substantial fees. You could make a case that this model can be successful if the players are mostly well selected. However, with new rules there will be significant limits on how many players we can send out on loan, leaving the potential for a bloated squad full of inexperience. There needs to be some balance in their approach.

We do right now. Without Emma and these owners picking her replacement?

Given what we know now then title should not be about Todd, he only owns 10% of the club, he has little power now.

Is all Egbhali and Clearlake with their 63%. They hold the power, they have created this mess.

18 hours ago, icecoolguy22 said:

God sake, people still blaming Roman for everything happened after his unfortunate departure. Yes, he could have done better by having a perfect team setup to win titles for the next decade, but Boehly and his crew would sell it for a profit and replace them with a bunch of expensive wonder kids. We were a solid top 4 team with no debt, WTF more  could one ask?

Is the PR machine Clearlake and co have running. Is part of why they reported the misdeeds they found, paint Roman In a bad light, break the fans connection to him, paint themselves in a good light.

They know how to use the media. 

 

Pretty damning video.

Edited December 16, 20232 yr by Drogba1

Just need more windows is all. 
 

 

16 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Just need more windows is all. 
 

 

We just need to spread our four transfer windows over eight seasons.

No excuses now just sign elite players in their prime 25-28 year olds or there abouts. Top striker, commanding CB to replace the eventual departure of Silva and a creative midfielder who can play direct route one through balls either in transition or through packed defenses. Finally a world class keeper is a must.

I would argue keeper and striker are the two positions that must be addressed sooner rather than later.

Which elite players will want to come to a mid-table team with no european football?

8 minutes ago, Zeta said:

Which elite players will want to come to a mid-table team with no european football?

sh*t ones.

Back to back Ligue 1 wins for Strasbourg, and they've now dragged themselves up to 9th.

I wonder if the fans are still complaining about their new owners ? Probably ... 🙂 

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

Back to back Ligue 1 wins for Strasbourg, and they've now dragged themselves up to 9th.

I wonder if the fans are still complaining about their new owners ? Probably ... 🙂 

How's our Brazilian winger doing there?

19 hours ago, axman2526 said:

How's our Brazilian winger doing there?

Just the 2 assist so far. Hasn't really done much of note but like all of them its the long game. Here he is compared to Dembele. 

19 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Just the 2 assist so far. Hasn't really done much of note but like all of them its the long game. Here he is compared to Dembele. 

Cheers for that, no surprise Dembele scores better.