3 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Time will tell.

And that's it .

When the ten years embargo on taking dividends and selling shares is up , that's when they must be looking at for lining their pockets surely?

5 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

And that's it .

When the ten years embargo on taking dividends and selling shares is up , that's when they must be looking at for lining their pockets surely?

Yes and no.

The ownership have expressed, on more than 1 occasions,  that Roman did not run the club well from a business stand point.

They have slashed the wages for a start. What else they are doing off the pitch I don't know but will be interesting to see, after a few years, if the club is making profits each year rather than the losses we did under Roman.

Could be they find ways of making us profitable, so long as we stay in the PL. Smaller profits, then the big one in 8 and a half years.

1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

Yes and no.

The ownership have expressed, on more than 1 occasions,  that Roman did not run the club well from a business stand point.

They have slashed the wages for a start. What else they are doing off the pitch I don't know but will be interesting to see, after a few years, if the club is making profits each year rather than the losses we did under Roman.

Could be they find ways of making us profitable, so long as we stay in the PL. Smaller profits, then the big one in 8 and a half years.

Pretty much that, it's profit over football success. I'm sure they will be happy if we win a cup this season or not, but won't be if we win a cup while losing money. The owners probably don't even watch football for fun, so as long as results are passable and investor get their dividends, they are happy

The owners also understand the power of PR.

Most of the top journos seem to like them, I wonder why? 🤑

From a year ago, Jose F, watch from minute 16 onwards, that is about us:

 

They don't need us to be a winning machine to make money.

5 hours ago, axman2526 said:

From a year ago, Jose F, watch from minute 16 onwards, that is about us:

 

They don't need us to be a winning machine to make money.

With all the focus on Boehly, I don't think I've ever heard this guy speak before, He comes across as a very serious and competent guy.

So, the plan is to develop "hidden" assets, with a medium term (3-7 years) timeframe ... and to reach £1 billion per annum of revenue ... much more to that than simply cashing in on a few academy players. I guess we all buckle up, have a bit more faith, and try and enjoy the ride ! Interesting what he says about the importance of the fans as a stakeholder. For the fans to be fully onboard and engaged, the team is going to have to be successful and good to watch,

I'm quite looking forward to this year's first set of company accounts under the Clearlake ownership, as much for the strategic statements from Clearlake on their progress  to date as for the numbers.

9 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Yes and no.

The ownership have expressed, on more than 1 occasions,  that Roman did not run the club well from a business stand point.

They have slashed the wages for a start. What else they are doing off the pitch I don't know but will be interesting to see, after a few years, if the club is making profits each year rather than the losses we did under Roman.

Could be they find ways of making us profitable, so long as we stay in the PL. Smaller profits, then the big one in 8 and a half years.

I think its a given we werent run well as a business under Roman, but then we didnt need to as he just covered all that, I dont think its a coincidence that Roman was more than happy to see FFP being enforced. The new lads definitely inherited a sh*t show as they couldnt just keep covering all the losses, the massive amount of payoffs Roman made to managers, players, coaches etc.

This doesnt get fixed and settled overnight, this is 3 or 4 years of tidying up finances and controls, they front loaded purchases and spending as I expect they see problems ahead from the FA, UEFA etc.

3 hours ago, dkw said:

The new lads definitely inherited a sh*t show as they couldnt just keep covering all the losses, the massive amount of payoffs Roman made to managers, players, coaches etc.

This doesnt get fixed and settled overnight, this is 3 or 4 years of tidying up finances and controls, they front loaded purchases and spending as I expect they see problems ahead from the FA, UEFA etc.

The new board bought a blank canvas, Roman had covered and written off the debts.

The only financial trouble they will get into now is their own.

19 minutes ago, Modueke said:

The new board bought a blank canvas, Roman had covered and written off the debts.

The only financial trouble they will get into now is their own.

Assuming the Premier League don't deduct us points. 

28 minutes ago, Modueke said:

The new board bought a blank canvas, Roman had covered and written off the debts.

The only financial trouble they will get into now is their own.

Apart from inheriting RA's off-the-books shenanigans which could, as Sconnie suggests, prove costly.

35 minutes ago, Modueke said:

The new board bought a blank canvas, Roman had covered and written off the debts.

The only financial trouble they will get into now is their own.

I was thinking more the wages, legacy payments to managers/coaches etc to fit with FFP rather than actual club debt.

Far be it to jump down any conspiracy rabbit holes, but as the club was literally handed over, they could just make up any sh*t now. It’s not as if Roman can do anything about it!

Of course, if Todd and co had the clubs best interest, they would fight it, and am aware it was them that pointed out the dodgy dealings apparently, but I just wouldn’t trust it overall with how the club was stolen!

1 hour ago, Modueke said:

The new board bought a blank canvas, Roman had covered and written off the debts.

The only financial trouble they will get into now is their own.

OK sure ... historical debt over 19 years (£1.5 billion) was "written off", but they still essentially bought a loss-making club based on the day-to-day operations, and which only had the odd year in profit when it coincided with significant player sales.

If they hadn't made any changes, it would have continued to be a loss-making club ... and that loss would have been even larger without CL revenues in the mix ... 

Edited January 12, 20242 yr by Sexyfootball

10 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

OK sure ... historical debt over 19 years (£1.5 billion) was "written off", but they still essentially bought a loss-making club based on the day-to-day operations, and which only had the odd year in profit when it coincided with significant player sales.

If they hadn't made any changes, it would have continued to be a loss-making club ... and that loss would have been even larger without CL revenues in the mix ... 

Which of course then shows how worse they’ve made it by making huge noddy ‘investments’ with nearly the same amount as that historical debt in less than 2 years!

 

48 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

 

It will be interesting to see how close to the mark they are come April, when the figures are in the public domain !

A lot more to it then simply balancing transfers though - we could make £4.1m on players out vs in, but still lose a shed load of money as a business (under the old model anyway)

Wages came to £332.8m in 20/21 (77% of turnover) and £340.2m in 21/22 (71% of turnover) - going to be very interesting to see how much of a dent they have made in that number for 22/23 with all these new-style contracts, albeit with a significant downturn in performance in the short term (and hopefully not the medium term !) 🙂 

1 minute ago, Sexyfootball said:

It will be interesting to see how close to the mark they are come April, when the figures are in the public domain !

A lot more to it then simply balancing transfers though - we could make £4.1m on players out vs in, but still lose a shed load of money as a business (under the old model anyway)

Wages came to £332.8m in 20/21 (77% of turnover) and £340.2m in 21/22 (71% of turnover) - going to be very interesting to see how much of a dent they have made in that number for 22/23 with all these new-style contracts, albeit with a significant downturn in performance in the short term (and hopefully not the medium term !) 🙂 

By various reports we've reduced the wage bill/operation costs tremendously. I too look forward to the numbers. 

The following Video is by Jan, a positive Chelsea fan with no connection directly at the club. It is a good explanation of our spending, and why our owners believe the club is in a good place with FFP and money in general:

 

 

 

But didn't the owners put us in  £800 million debt almost straight away with their borrowing?

And now they are considering another £200 to £500 million borrowing from Bank of America which would add to our debt ?

How does that debt impact us with FFP and P & S rules .

Can anyone enlighten me please .?

Thanks 👍

 

Some hullabaloo about Todd using our last match to promote a film a company he owns is making. 

Some guys behind Poch and the bench brushing their teeth and reading books.

https://www.football.london/arsenal-fc/news/premier-league-ffp-charge-date-28444505

10 hours ago, mojo said:

https://www.football.london/arsenal-fc/news/premier-league-ffp-charge-date-28444505

Athletic reporting that Everton and Forest in breach. 

Chelsea have been found not to have broken profit and sustainability rules and are safe for another 12 months.

8 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Chelsea have been found not to have broken profit and sustainability rules and are safe for another 12 months.

On a rolling 3 year average we must be due to announce a pretty healthy set of accounts for 22/23 in that case (or have had all our mitigation accepted as valid)

Good news either way !

Now ... about that new striker, centre back, left back ... 🙂