I'm way past trying to make sense of things happening at the club, just treat it as a bad Sitcom and may get a laugh once in a while. If we are so keen to give Atletico money to send Gallgher deal over the line, why not bid 120M for Oblak? I'm sure we could easily send the other 6 GKs on loan once we seal the deal.

11 hours ago, Vialli96 said:

The last Chelsea squad that finished 3rd in the PL in 2022 pre Clearlake/Boehly takeover:

Mendy/Kepa              
James/Azpi
Silva
Rudiger
Chalobah/Christensen/Zouma
Alonso/Chilwell/Emerson
Jorginho
Kante
Kovacic
Gilmour/Barkley/RLC
Mount
Ziyech/ Hudson Odoi
Werner/ Havertz
Abraham/Lukaku 

To think we’ve spent £1.5 billion since the takeover and now have a considerably weaker first team, squad and manager.
 

Never thought Id say this, but I miss the stability we had under the previous ownership, the scouting network under the management of Cech, the comparatively shrewd business done by Marina in the transfer market, the fact we werent mugs being taken advantage of by every club. We were challenging year on year for titles and cups and now were a club thats fallen to mid table mediocracy. The priority used to be winning football matches, now its turning the club into a franchise, tying young players into long contracts and selling them for ‘pure profit’. 

It’s difficult for me to get behind the team as the club’s principles are not ones that I can stand for. 

Sorry but this shrewd deals thing with Marina just isn't true for the most part and I do get the clamouring for the Roman era because he was a generous owner that loved the club but we made some absolutely atrocious signings for huge money as well as poor business decisions. Not to mention we were £1.5bn in debt when Roman sold us because our business was decisions were poor, sooner or later it was going to come back to bite us and with investigations ongoing it still is biting us 2 and a half years later.

Unfortunately as fans we're just going to have to be patient which isn't easy to do when we're used to winning stuff every season. The new owners have had to rebuild everything from scratch because we haemorrhaged money almost every season so this meant rebuilding behind the scenes as well as getting rid of a lot of dross on big wages.

They are trying to run a European football club like an American sports franchise. 
 

This will not work!! 
 

League position has consequences here unlike the US, you need success here to breed revenue.

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

The strategy is to maximise the overall asset value and worth of the company as a whole and therefore the profit available from the turnover of players far outweighs the unpredictability of financial gain from on field success. These people are fully on board with the media deals as they are a guaranteed income stream, but anything that comes along that will increase that earning potential they will be totally on board with as well.

The churning of players is based upon the the analytics implying that a percentage of these players will, at some point, increase dramatically in value and to that end they have no option but to be wedded to some form of on field success as it directly correlates with player values.

However with the continuing stagnation of our success on the pitch, in commercial terms (nobody is pumping millions of advertising into a Conference league side, nobody is paying millions for unfit, or underperforming, or non playing players) means that they have had no option but to look at homegrown players to cover this commercial player trading philosophy. I read somewhere (not sure if it is true) but our amortised annualised day-one position is -£200m. That's a lot of ground to recover each year if true. At the moment there is still deadwood and low hanging fruit to cash in on whilst we wait for either the team or selections of players to catch fire and increase in value.

With only a small selection of clubs forming the basis of a viable market for this philosophy to operate in, they will see it imperative to maintain good relations with these "partners". They have already pi$$ed on their own chips once with PSG, so i can definitely see us coming up with some form of sweetener with Ath Madrid over tis Omorodion collapse.

I am convinced that they will be managing Reece James very closely until the winter window or season end. They have a ready made replacement, keep James fit and healthy and he is the next cab on the rank. With the inevitable slowing up of academy graduates coming through and getting professional contracts so that they can be sold then surely the remaining pure profit players and then those with the most increased value will be next. Colwill and Palmer are prime candidates in the future, especially as we are stocked with CB and RW players.

As i have been saying, for me, i detest it, because it has nothing to do with sporting endeavour. They have torn out the heart and soul of the club as we all knew it. Its not the players faults, they still want to be successful footballers and are happy joining Chelsea. Its not the manager's fault, he is trying his best to be successful on the pitch  knowing full well that his bosses do not view this as the club's primary purposes. Despise these to$$ers that are in control of the club.

I agree with most of this except the part about palmer and colwill because of below...

16 minutes ago, El regreso said:

 

League position has consequences here unlike the US, you need success here to breed revenue.

...this is the reason why they will have to hold back and not sell the ones keeping us relevant in the league. Yes one day they will sell palmer but not before they know they have a replacement that can replicate his success. Madueke as seen during preseason isn't ready or may not even be the one.

Same for colwill too...we haven't got the cbs to keep us up atm. Even with colwill it will be hard.

Also one of the reasons they actually said colwill and reece was off limits for sales last season and for the other reason of not reaching their "sale target price" yet. They wouldn't have got the price they wanted for them 2 if they sold them last season...Next season/January, depending on his potential price increase (if he stays fit) I see reece hitting the "sales target price" they set for him. He might go...we have gusto to replace him (until he reaches his sale target price and is a decent replacement of PL quality)

I think they are balancing it out as best as they can.

 

Edited August 12, 20241 yr by Simplymo

34 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Unfortunately as fans we're just going to have to be patient which isn't easy to do when we're used to winning stuff every season. The new owners have had to rebuild everything from scratch because we haemorrhaged money almost every season so this meant rebuilding behind the scenes as well as getting rid of a lot of dross on big wages.

Here's where I take issue. Every managerial appointment made under this ownership group has come with a message that we "must be patient" whilst the new manager builds something. We're about to embark on our third season of Clearlake ownership and it feels like we're still at square one, only the squad has become bloated, and bereft of experience.

It's all very well asking for patience, but that message is going to ring hollow to the fans spending hard earned money week in week out to watch this team. They've been pretty patient all things considered, and towards the end of last season there was a feeling in the ground that it was starting to pay off, but that was undone within a week of the season ending. So they've a right to voice their displeasure.

What happens if the fans turn on Maresca in 8-12 weeks and he gets the axe? Are we just in a cycle of managers coming in and needing time to bed in whilst the fanbase becomes increasingly unhappy with our lack of progress?

2 minutes ago, cfr95 said:

What happens if the fans turn on Maresca in 8-12 weeks and he gets the axe? Are we just in a cycle of managers coming in and needing time to bed in whilst the fanbase becomes increasingly unhappy with our lack of progress?

Yes.

51 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Sorry but this shrewd deals thing with Marina just isn't true for the most part and I do get the clamouring for the Roman era because he was a generous owner that loved the club but we made some absolutely atrocious signings for huge money as well as poor business decisions. Not to mention we were £1.5bn in debt when Roman sold us because our business was decisions were poor, sooner or later it was going to come back to bite us and with investigations ongoing it still is biting us 2 and a half years later.

Unfortunately as fans we're just going to have to be patient which isn't easy to do when we're used to winning stuff every season. The new owners have had to rebuild everything from scratch because we haemorrhaged money almost every season so this meant rebuilding behind the scenes as well as getting rid of a lot of dross on big wages.

I get what you are saying here but the Roman model that you are referring to resulted in £1.5bn of debt over a 20 year period. Haven't this lot hemorrhaged this much and possible more in a little over a tenth of the time. The expectation is that these funds will be recovered and improved upon because of the amount of young footballers that we have acquired.

To me the only difference is that the Roman model spent money on marquee signings (along with some dross as well) to maintain the winning formula. This model is to maximize profit from trading players which will maximize the overall profitability and asset value of the holding company. If there is success on the pitch as a by product, happy days.

You know how they said we'd see a "return" (or understand the project at least) after 4 yrs. Does that mean this upcoming season (as year 4) or after the season ends? Which means we will be challenging in year 5 (25-26 season)?

All this mixing of business and football terminology confuses the fk out of me!

23 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

I get what you are saying here but the Roman model that you are referring to resulted in £1.5bn of debt over a 20 year period. Haven't this lot hemorrhaged this much and possible more in a little over a tenth of the time. The expectation is that these funds will be recovered and improved upon because of the amount of young footballers that we have acquired.

To me the only difference is that the Roman model spent money on marquee signings (along with some dross as well) to maintain the winning formula. This model is to maximize profit from trading players which will maximize the overall profitability and asset value of the holding company. If there is success on the pitch as a by product, happy days.

That's the official figure. The leaking of the Oligarch Files revealed myriad loans, transfers of cash, et al, between his hundreds of companies. His real total financial input might never be known.

 

5 hours ago, timetowaste said:

The new owners have had to rebuild everything from scratch

That'd be fine if it wasn't for that they keep rubbing out the sketch and leaving a massive pile of lead stained rubber building up on the paper. They are making no progress after 1.5 billion in a couple of years as they have absolutely no idea what they're doing.

As we currently work our way through trying to find someone, anyone at Atletico Madrid who will sign for us to finance them buying Gallagher, our new owners are looking the biggest clowns in world football.

4 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

I get what you are saying here but the Roman model that you are referring to resulted in £1.5bn of debt over a 20 year period. Haven't this lot hemorrhaged this much and possible more in a little over a tenth of the time. The expectation is that these funds will be recovered and improved upon because of the amount of young footballers that we have acquired.

To me the only difference is that the Roman model spent money on marquee signings (along with some dross as well) to maintain the winning formula. This model is to maximize profit from trading players which will maximize the overall profitability and asset value of the holding company. If there is success on the pitch as a by product, happy days.

Sorry but I think you are viewing the economics and indeed operations model adopted by RA through tinted glasses. 

First off the  of £1.5 debt  accumulated under RAs tenure needs to be mitigated and adjusted significantly to take into account relative values and inflation. A better measure would be the year on year loss as a % of turnover. It’s an interesting and enlightening exercise when you learn that in for instance 2005/6 the losses were £78 million against a turnover of £130 million it becomes even more stark when you consider in the first 5 full years of RAs ownership accumulated losses were £421 million and turnover was £725 million.

To be fair you are right about some of the dross that was purchased under RA for me there were far more than just a few the number of players who were sold for way less than their purchase price is mind blowing yet the players bought in did indeed produce the goods but at that point in time the only real challengers when it came to buying top players were the likes of Utd , Arsenal and possibly Liverpool now you have to throw into the pot that even the likes of Bournemouth are shelling out £30 million  pound fees whereas in 2003/4 you could get the likes of Cavallio for £20 million. What would he cost now £70 milion ? 
 

I know that we have seen the likes of Kouibally moved on for a small loss but under RA without the constraint of PSR and FFP still very much in it formative years many of those dross players were simply sent away on loan . 

 

5 hours ago, dermott said:

That's the official figure. The leaking of the Oligarch Files revealed myriad loans, transfers of cash, et al, between his hundreds of companies. His real total financial input might never be known.

 

Indeed.To the possible additional sums you talk about you need to factor in sums that weren’t in that debt because sums were converted into equity

Some on here really need to gain some perspective. Of course we had some great times under RA and for that I will be eternally grateful but for a number of reasons when he left there have been multiple issues that have had to be dealt with in terms of administration but also you had issues around the ex associates of RA then you need to look at the underperformance of the commercial team, the lack of focus of the medical team that had to be rebuilt .
I could go on but almost certainly all that some will say is the owners are clowns which they clearly aren’t but having been in a big organisation that had to be restructured in not too dissimilar way to the changes Chelsea are undergoing I for one was predicting a dip in performance .
 

 

23 minutes ago, terraloon said:

Indeed.To the possible additional sums you talk about you need to factor in sums that weren’t in that debt because sums were converted into equity

Some on here really need to gain some perspective. Of course we had some great times under RA and for that I will be eternally grateful but for a number of reasons when he left there have been multiple issues that have had to be dealt with in terms of administration but also you had issues around the ex associates of RA then you need to look at the underperformance of the commercial team, the lack of focus of the medical team that had to be rebuilt .
I could go on but almost certainly all that some will say is the owners are clowns which they clearly aren’t but having been in a big organisation that had to be restructured in not too dissimilar way to the changes Chelsea are undergoing I for one was predicting a dip in performance .
 

 

What a load of crap. How some people believe we are in a better position now than before is beyond me. I find that usually these people tend to be those who have never kicked a football in their lives, have zero competitive spirit and are serial losers, the type who always believed that taking part was more important than winning.

Edited August 12, 20241 yr by Vialli96

13 minutes ago, Vialli96 said:

What a load of crap. How some people believe we are in a better position now than before is beyond me. I find that usually these people tend to be those who have never kicked a football in their lives, have zero competitive spirit and are serial losers, the type who always believed that taking part was more important than winning.

I think you clearly have missed the point and sorry you absolutely  know nothing about me or indeed my history 

For instance I played semi pro football admittedly not at a high level but high enough I also have a history of football administration again not at FL level but level 3 of NL where I had a role as financial director and Comapny Secretary so I would guess  I have a far better grasp of the challenges, requirements and structure of football finances than your good self

I don’t believe we are in a better position that the glory RA years but without doubt we are in a better position than was conceivable at the time of the sanctions. 
 

You clearly , and yes I am doing what I accuse you of, aren’t able to deal with the fact that we are not guaranteed sucess but above all it’s abundantly clear that you are blinkered just as to the challenges that RAs demise has presented the new owners.

Edited August 12, 20241 yr by terraloon

6 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

I get what you are saying here but the Roman model that you are referring to resulted in £1.5bn of debt over a 20 year period. Haven't this lot hemorrhaged this much and possible more in a little over a tenth of the time. The expectation is that these funds will be recovered and improved upon because of the amount of young footballers that we have acquired.

To me the only difference is that the Roman model spent money on marquee signings (along with some dross as well) to maintain the winning formula. This model is to maximize profit from trading players which will maximize the overall profitability and asset value of the holding company. If there is success on the pitch as a by product, happy days.

Spot on!.

Our owners look at Brighton with envy, making profits without winning anything, that's all they want for us

 

How much are the 50 players costing us in wages?

And no doubt Chelsea will start making profits just in time for our investors to take dividends and trade shares when the 10 year embargo is up.

How much are the 50 players costing us in wages?

And no doubt Chelsea will start making profits just in time for our investors to take dividends and trade shares when the 10 year embargo is up.

2 hours ago, Vialli96 said:

What a load of crap. How some people believe we are in a better position now than before is beyond me. I find that usually these people tend to be those who have never kicked a football in their lives, have zero competitive spirit and are serial losers, the type who always believed that taking part was more important than winning.

If only there were a Ballon d'Or for Bilge.

I can’t believe it’s actually getting worse . No clue on transfers shirts sponsorship anything about value for money . Honestly worried about our future 

5 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

How much are the 50 players costing us in wages?

And no doubt Chelsea will start making profits just in time for our investors to take dividends and trade shares when the 10 year embargo is up.

Apparently we are aiming to reduce the outfield squad to about 23/24 players by the end of this transfer window. So, forgetting the crazy situation with goalkeepers and allowing for several younger players that will be loaned or even incorporated into our U21 squad (e.g. Kellyman) I think they are still planning to offload at least 10 players in the next 18 days, and with loan rules most of those will need to be sold. Presumably the list includes Chalobah, Chilwell, Broja, Casadei, Gabriel, Moreira, D. Fofana, Lukaku. But speculation about Carney, Sterling and Noni too. However, those last 3 in particular would probably count as losses in the balance sheet and presumably require more academy sales before end next June...

3 hours ago, Aussie79 said:

I can’t believe it’s actually getting worse . No clue on transfers shirts sponsorship anything about value for money . Honestly worried about our future 

Except that London is an international city, we play in blue, we're based in west London and we've won something in every decade since I was born. People probably should catastrophize a little less. 

Anyone need convincing still of their back handed dealings?

19 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

The strategy is to maximise the overall asset value and worth of the company as a whole and therefore the profit available from the turnover of players far outweighs the unpredictability of financial gain from on field success. These people are fully on board with the media deals as they are a guaranteed income stream, but anything that comes along that will increase that earning potential they will be totally on board with as well.

The churning of players is based upon the the analytics implying that a percentage of these players will, at some point, increase dramatically in value and to that end they have no option but to be wedded to some form of on field success as it directly correlates with player values.

However with the continuing stagnation of our success on the pitch, in commercial terms (nobody is pumping millions of advertising into a Conference league side, nobody is paying millions for unfit, or underperforming, or non playing players) means that they have had no option but to look at homegrown players to cover this commercial player trading philosophy. I read somewhere (not sure if it is true) but our amortised annualised day-one position is -£200m. That's a lot of ground to recover each year if true. At the moment there is still deadwood and low hanging fruit to cash in on whilst we wait for either the team or selections of players to catch fire and increase in value.

With only a small selection of clubs forming the basis of a viable market for this philosophy to operate in, they will see it imperative to maintain good relations with these "partners". They have already pi$$ed on their own chips once with PSG, so i can definitely see us coming up with some form of sweetener with Ath Madrid over tis Omorodion collapse.

I am convinced that they will be managing Reece James very closely until the winter window or season end. They have a ready made replacement, keep James fit and healthy and he is the next cab on the rank. With the inevitable slowing up of academy graduates coming through and getting professional contracts so that they can be sold then surely the remaining pure profit players and then those with the most increased value will be next. Colwill and Palmer are prime candidates in the future, especially as we are stocked with CB and RW players.

As i have been saying, for me, i detest it, because it has nothing to do with sporting endeavour. They have torn out the heart and soul of the club as we all knew it. Its not the players faults, they still want to be successful footballers and are happy joining Chelsea. Its not the manager's fault, he is trying his best to be successful on the pitch  knowing full well that his bosses do not view this as the club's primary purposes. Despise these to$$ers that are in control of the club.

Makes sense why they have bought neto, kendry paez, angelo, estevao willian as winger options to eventually replace cole palmer

 

The next to go are reece and colwill and this season

Chilwell, broja, lukaku, chalobah (pure profit), possibly sterling but he won't leave

19 hours ago, icecoolguy22 said:

I'm way past trying to make sense of things happening at the club, just treat it as a bad Sitcom and may get a laugh once in a while. If we are so keen to give Atletico money to send Gallgher deal over the line, why not bid 120M for Oblak? I'm sure we could easily send the other 6 GKs on loan once we seal the deal.

Doesn't fit wage structure and he's over the age of 25 duh

3 hours ago, Conte said:

Makes sense why they have bought neto, kendry paez, angelo, estevao willian as winger options to eventually replace cole palmer

 

The next to go are reece and colwill and this season

Chilwell, broja, lukaku, chalobah (pure profit), possibly sterling but he won't leave

 

Some of you need to get a f**king grip 😅