1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

No European games means less revenue from the gates. Increase prices to cover the loss of CL gates. Maybe next increase price of concessions. Logical.

Yup , fans have to pay more because our owners have f**ked the club up.

Practically every business in the UK has had to put up prices what with inflation and associated wage increases, surge in energy prices etc etc.

The fact that Clearlake have absorbed all this up to now is surely a laudable thing, but sooner or later it was coming, and I don't see this as any additional reason for owner-bashing at this point. especially when there is zero detail yet on how much it is going up.

 

2 hours ago, Modueke said:

The price rising, after such amazing football since the takeover! The nerve of it!

And the nerve of the supporters who will buy them and enable such despicable act.

35 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Practically every business in the UK has had to put up prices what with inflation and associated wage increases, surge in energy prices etc etc.

The fact that Clearlake have absorbed all this up to now is surely a laudable thing, but sooner or later it was coming, and I don't see this as any additional reason for owner-bashing at this point. especially when there is zero detail yet on how much it is going up.

 

Aye but the quality of our players has gone down so much it's a bit like Shrinkflation.

We've been paying the same price for half the quality and half goals.

2 minutes ago, Whats_The_Mata? said:

We've been paying the same price for half the quality and half goals.

Half? That is over-optimism 😊 

3 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

Practically every business in the UK has had to put up prices what with inflation and associated wage increases, surge in energy prices etc etc.

The fact that Clearlake have absorbed all this up to now is surely a laudable thing, but sooner or later it was coming, and I don't see this as any additional reason for owner-bashing at this point. especially when there is zero detail yet on how much it is going up.

 

The biggest inflation at Chelsea is the ridiculous amount of money we've paid for players.

Let our wealthy owners pay for their own mismanagement of our club , not the fans.

No CL income for another season after nearly 20 years of CL football and the worst results for decades is also down to them.

Ticket prices should be reduced 

2 hours ago, abister1 said:

And the nerve of the supporters who will buy them and enable such despicable act.

No alternative regrettably.

 

And what will our owners do with the extra money that the fans will pay to watch Chelsea?

I don't trust them with a penny of my hard earned 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/dec/27/todd-boehly-chelsea-transfer-failure-premier-league

13 minutes ago, abister1 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/dec/27/todd-boehly-chelsea-transfer-failure-premier-league

Old news. Already been discussed on page 422 🙂 

Todd Boehly's a prick.

2 hours ago, Gonoir Beniashile said:

Todd Boehly's a prick.

Is it a small one or big one?😂

26 minutes ago, abister1 said:

Is it a small one or big one?😂

It's one with a bad hair cut who hates Chelsea fans.

22 minutes ago, Gonoir Beniashile said:

It's one with a bad hair cut who hates Chelsea fans.

Oh, that bell end. 

He's turned out to be a big f**king bell end, with no idea about football. (as in proper football) With all the money at his or advisers disposal, a complete f**k up on a grand scale.

On 30/12/2023 at 04:01, Sexyfootball said:

Practically every business in the UK has had to put up prices what with inflation and associated wage increases, surge in energy prices etc etc.

The fact that Clearlake have absorbed all this up to now is surely a laudable thing, but sooner or later it was coming, and I don't see this as any additional reason for owner-bashing at this point. especially when there is zero detail yet on how much it is going up.

 

Wages have barely increased with inflation and that is only relevant to the club's operational costs, which are trivial compared to other expenses.

Matchday revenue is actually a fairly limited income stream that is primarily used to offset gameday expenses (eg police/security costs, hospitality wages etc) and that is especially true given our stadium situation. Broadcast revenue is much, much higher.

In truth, it is the sacking and hiring of new club staff that likely forms the club's biggest operational, non-football expense. That is entirely down to Blueco's doing and their decision making over the past year. These price increases, I suspect, are to test the waters for new price models into the future.

 

 

 

Just like most Americans ( with all due respect), the owners have no real interest in football as a sport, so everything they have done and will do are based on making a profits. Big investment up front, some short returns are to be expected by the investors, and if no profits after a few years, we know what to expect. Football results are side business, of course they know winning bring profits too, at a certain price.

12 hours ago, icecoolguy22 said:

Just like most Americans ( with all due respect), the owners have no real interest in football as a sport, so everything they have done and will do are based on making a profits. Big investment up front, some short returns are to be expected by the investors, and if no profits after a few years, we know what to expect. Football results are side business, of course they know winning bring profits too, at a certain price.

There is some truth in this, but it has nothing to do with the fact that Boehly is American. For one thing Clearlake are more than just Boehly. He is only one piece of the group. Most corporate owners of sports teams will operate this way. Business and profits first. There is no room for sentiment or tradition in their model, unless it somehow affects the bottom line. Owners like Roman will be increasingly rarer in the modern game, especially with FFP rules.

1 hour ago, forbzy said:

There is some truth in this, but it has nothing to do with the fact that Boehly is American. For one thing Clearlake are more than just Boehly. He is only one piece of the group. Most corporate owners of sports teams will operate this way. Business and profits first. There is no room for sentiment or tradition in their model, unless it somehow affects the bottom line. Owners like Roman will be increasingly rarer in the modern game, especially with FFP rules.

RA was unique. At some point he wasn’t going to be the owner and let’s face it the visa issue can now be seen the start of the end.

Chelsea FC can’t operate in a vacuum. FFP as of 21/22  was a conundrum but the changes now being implemented by UEFA will be presenting yet more challenge to the owners who have to be mindful of  the present , future and  now have to deal with issues that come about during a previous owners tenure in reality there are  accounting and administrative time bombs that need to be defused in a completely different environment to the one that RA had to endure when he bought out Ken.

For instance the historical amortisation and squad cost going forward had to be addressed. The word is that the overall squad costs alone have been reduced by in excess of £57million pa. A football club generating the levels of money Chelsea FC have historically simply can’t spend the sums it had hitherto.

Do I fully understand the length of contracts being awarded? Actually I am pretty relaxed about that aspect .Yes it is a departure from what is considered the previous convention but not that long ago even three year deals were considered a big gamble. The changes that UEFA have already introduced ( and thePL will in the not too distant future) around the length a fee can be amortised will actually impact all clubs the irony is most clubs already depreciate fees over the  five year limit that will be set going forward.

It trips of the tongue to say that the club is in transition but it really is . The players bought in are in the main young  and in experienced some won’t get close to the level required but as we have witnessed time after players bought in with experience aren’t guaranteed to perform.

Of course I wish we were challenging for trophies akin to the RA days and yes I do believe the quality of the squad should see us higher up the league but a combination of factors such as injuries, confidence but above all the inability of players be they experienced  PL players , bought in, young or old to put the ball in the net from what are bead and butter situation  has been in explicable 
 

American owners  in general will be far more mindful of the bottom line than a benefactor type owner meaning that the transition from RA to Clearlake was always going to be painful. 
 

The sanctions had left the club in a mess .
 

Players leaving on frees, the inability to negotiate contract extensions, sponsorship in limbo, the requirement ( politically) to move on the likes of Marina and Cech were bound to be a negative all in all the to do list really was extensive.

The new owners are very experienced in sport ownership. Football wise they are naive but from what I am told vast swathes of the off field operation was far from functional the commercial and professional focus was not close to the level they are used to. 
 

Finally let’s just for one second think about the potential increase in matchday. My season ticket was in the West Lower. It cost £900 for many years ,it still is £900 to be honest if the cost had tracked inflation it would be in excess of £1200 . Would I want to pay more? Of course not but there does need to be a big ole dose of reality 

22 minutes ago, terraloon said:

RA was unique. At some point he wasn’t going to be the owner and let’s face it the visa issue can now be seen the start of the end.

Chelsea FC can’t operate in a vacuum. FFP as of 21/22  was a conundrum but the changes now being implemented by UEFA will be presenting yet more challenge to the owners who have to be mindful of  the present , future and  now have to deal with issues that come about during a previous owners tenure in reality there are  accounting and administrative time bombs that need to be defused in a completely different environment to the one that RA had to endure when he bought out Ken.

For instance the historical amortisation and squad cost going forward had to be addressed. The word is that the overall squad costs alone have been reduced by in excess of £57million pa. A football club generating the levels of money Chelsea FC have historically simply can’t spend the sums it had hitherto.

Do I fully understand the length of contracts being awarded? Actually I am pretty relaxed about that aspect .Yes it is a departure from what is considered the previous convention but not that long ago even three year deals were considered a big gamble. The changes that UEFA have already introduced ( and thePL will in the not too distant future) around the length a fee can be amortised will actually impact all clubs the irony is most clubs already depreciate fees over the  five year limit that will be set going forward.

It trips of the tongue to say that the club is in transition but it really is . The players bought in are in the main young  and in experienced some won’t get close to the level required but as we have witnessed time after players bought in with experience aren’t guaranteed to perform.

Of course I wish we were challenging for trophies akin to the RA days and yes I do believe the quality of the squad should see us higher up the league but a combination of factors such as injuries, confidence but above all the inability of players be they experienced  PL players , bought in, young or old to put the ball in the net from what are bead and butter situation  has been in explicable 
 

American owners  in general will be far more mindful of the bottom line than a benefactor type owner meaning that the transition from RA to Clearlake was always going to be painful. 
 

The sanctions had left the club in a mess .
 

Players leaving on frees, the inability to negotiate contract extensions, sponsorship in limbo, the requirement ( politically) to move on the likes of Marina and Cech were bound to be a negative all in all the to do list really was extensive.

The new owners are very experienced in sport ownership. Football wise they are naive but from what I am told vast swathes of the off field operation was far from functional the commercial and professional focus was not close to the level they are used to. 
 

Finally let’s just for one second think about the potential increase in matchday. My season ticket was in the West Lower. It cost £900 for many years ,it still is £900 to be honest if the cost had tracked inflation it would be in excess of £1200 . Would I want to pay more? Of course not but there does need to be a big ole dose of reality 

Excellent post.

I'm quite looking forward to our 22/23 accounts being released around April time this year, to see how much they have managed to trim off the wage bill, and to what extent we are managing to the FFP targets.

Excellent post @terraloon, ticket prices have been frozen (or near as damn it) for years at the Bridge, weve been very lucky to have a generous owner who had no shareholders or board to keep happy, he just spent his money how he wanted. We are now the same as the vast majority of other teams in the sport, a business ran by businessmen, a club that needs to live within some sort of means. It really is as simple as that, its nothing to do with those "Dickehead" Americans who have no affinity with football or Chelsea (what a load of nonsense that statement is) Its just a simple economic fact that we now need to be ran to a financial plan rather than as a very rich mans toy, as fun as that was. 

2 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

Excellent post.

I'm quite looking forward to our 22/23 accounts being released around April time this year, to see how much they have managed to trim off the wage bill, and to what extent we are managing to the FFP targets.

Far too many journalists and of course supporters of whichever club tend to look at the headlines and never drill down and that is particularly relevant when it come to Chelsea’s accounts.

My background was taxation so looked at accounts on a very regular basis and whilst for every business you can see an accounting bottom line the numbers when it comes to FFP be it UEFAs or indeed the PL version we don’t get to see the numbers submitted by the club to the respective authorities for FFP

I will illustrate how the £114 million accounting loss in 21/22 won’t be close to the loss submitted for FFP. Without sight of all the submissions these comments are just my opinion 

1) Changes to the allowable sums that could be disallowed due to COVID included impaired sums if that sum can be tracked due to COVID. Chelsea uniquely included £76.7 million impaired. Never happened to that level before anywhere but if their is an audit trail then potentially all that £76.7 million will come off the bottom line. Will this be attributed to COVID or was it an accounting requirement following the change of ownership? 

This “ dispensation “ was mentioned in the written reasons following the Everton hearing yet based on what I have seen very few clubs claim any sums for impairment and nor had we prior to 20/21 when it was £14 ish million and 21/22 when as I say it was £76.7 million. 

2) £17.9 million was included in respect of on going historical issues .Not 100% sure but I think that all this sum will be discounted as exceptional item.

3) Certain types of depreciation charges are discounted as are sums expended on youth development and ladies football are likewise discounted.

4) Players out on loan take  with them any amortisation charge their original transfer fee attracts . If it’s an obligation to buy type loan then the agreed fee is factored in 

I won’t get into how previous years stack up but I would not be at all surprised if that £114 million was massively reduced to under the £35 million pa allowed (£105 million over 3 years ) 

When you bear in mind that going into 22/23 the only player who is  at the club who had a fee for FFP purposes that needed to be shown was Chillwell and even then his fee would be reduced because he signed a contract extension. 

Finally be very careful when it comes to fees paid. The 21/2 accounts told us that the club had signed 16 players for £368 milion. Transfer market agrees we did indeed sign 16 players but they say the cost was £ £530 million. Those 16 players were all the players signed by the Bohley group save the Summer 22 window where again the number of players signed was indeed the 11 they state but the £403 million they state the players cost will be massively overstated even if you say by 20 % then that’s closer to £300 million or circa £650 million in total averaged out I would imagine the amortisation charge for 23/24  will be closer to £100 million opposed to the £161 million in 21/22.

 

Think we have already trimmed the wage bill and operation costs by a considerable amount. Like stated above I look forward to seeing the actual numbers. 

That's an excellent break down @terraloon, its why i dont take seriously any of the twitter lot or reporters take on this as they simply dont have anywhere near enough data and just seem to pluck numbers out of thin air.

 

also, not sure im happy having the taxman on this forum, any information i may have divulged about my financial income was a complete lie and can in no way be used against in a court of law.....

Apparently later this month we'll have an understanding of whether we are complying with FFP. 

Edited January 4, 20242 yr by Sconnie Blue