50 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

It's frightening what's happening there. 

United will bounce back. Eventually. 

I don't think we would have. 

It's shocking isn't it, all the cost cutting, penny pinching yet also giving big contracts to staff then paying them off weeks later.

If we can remain close to Liverpool come the end of December will they sit down with Maresca and come up with a transfer plan to get us a striker, CB and keeper to compete for the title? Will they go back in and trigger Osimhens release clause?

8 hours ago, dkw said:

It's shocking isn't it, all the cost cutting, penny pinching yet also giving big contracts to staff then paying them off weeks later.

They really outdone themselves going from one extreme (sacking Ten Hag) to flip flopping to the other (giving him a new deal and coaching staff overhaul) solely on a 90 minute match only to fire him two months later anyway.

Still early days of course but the team we have in our hands seem to be well scouted, is built with some intelligence, consideration and we have a right type of coach it seems as well. Best part is it is miles off its best days. Our core players are 20-24 years old. 

We did what no one has done in club football and especially in the highest tier. We replaced everyone with young well scouted talent. 

Anyway we are still miles away from winning something important. By important I mean CL or Premier League. In the cups we could win. And it will be ups and downs but the talent we have is undoubtedly good led by Premier Leagues best player who is 22. 

What we need to do is to keep hold of these gems we have. Real Madrid come knocking I am sure.

 

38 minutes ago, evissy said:

Still early days of course but the team we have in our hands seem to be well scouted, is built with some intelligence, consideration and we have a right type of coach it seems as well. Best part is it is miles off its best days. Our core players are 20-24 years old. 

We did what no one has done in club football and especially in the highest tier. We replaced everyone with young well scouted talent. 

Anyway we are still miles away from winning something important. By important I mean CL or Premier League. In the cups we could win. And it will be ups and downs but the talent we have is undoubtedly good led by Premier Leagues best player who is 22. 

What we need to do is to keep hold of these gems we have. Real Madrid come knocking I am sure.

 

100%

I really love where we are atm, especially after doing what no one else has done before. We are way ahead of schedule too.

I'll use arteta as they have been the most recent title challengers after an overhaul.

Their overhaul was extremely basic compared to ours. A new manager, some staff and slowly replacing players over 3 or 4 yrs.

 

Ours was a new everything!

From owners to kit men (I think), I even read some canteen/nutritional experts were replaced! And I posted this before, I really doubt it will take us 5yrs to be where arsenal are now (constantly challenging or being referred to as title contenders).

There will still be a few dips and low points in our journey, its not only inevitable but it's part of the journey. You can't build a winning team if they haven't experienced defeat or hardship. It will happen.

But I love where we are atm. We have a very good squad and with a couple of tweeks, a squad that can be challenging for years to come when they are ready.

Year/season 4 is when the owners said we will see the progress and our first steps of becoming title challengers. Yet the media is forcing that narrative now (season/year 3). It just shows we are on the right track and ahead of schedule as maresca has been saying.

 

I am surprised we didn't hear about RM/PSG last year for Cole, tbh. Wait a bit, this summer it will be most of our team in the news, lol.

The media already have drafts written to create drama for chels in the transfer market. There is no way they won't focus on us during the transfer windows. Absolutely no fkn way...especially as they have sort of acknowledged that this crazy "experiment" by the owners may/will work!

Buckle up guys, just remember the media wants to cause disruption and drama, that's their job, don't fall for it!

Edited December 10, 20241 yr by Simplymo

Yes the stories of our massive spending without any improvements, too many players to fit into the changing rooms, scattergun buying strategy, are all a bit dull just now.

The 7 year contracts handed out like confetti on players nobody would want....Oh i cant wait to see the strategy for selling desirable players especially when our financial situation just looked up with the world club cup revenue. 

Boehly and co. should come into their own, about now -  Money is their game.

We havent changed the world of football ...yet but we do have momentum. 

The media for their part are trying to position us as title challengers just to try to take the pressure off their beloved Liverpool, but they were 11 points clear in November /December 2024 and that will be on their headstone if they slip. Its theirs to lose. 

Edited December 10, 20241 yr by OneTommyLangley

Yep, all those arguments have gone out the window in a way so they have to come up with the drama using a different narrative.

It will definitely be player sales, unhappy, etc. I can't think of anything else atm that they can blow up. Let's see what happens in the January window, maybe they are waiting for our owners to give them some ammo. 🤷‍♂️

11 hours ago, axman2526 said:

If we can remain close to Liverpool come the end of December will they sit down with Maresca and come up with a transfer plan to get us a striker, CB and keeper to compete for the title? Will they go back in and trigger Osimhens release clause?

Striker I think we wait until the summer (unless there is an unearthed gem none of us know about). 

I can see a scenario where we recall Santos and get a CB in January. 

20 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

And now we wait. Said it a while back but if City are found guilty, the only appropriate punishment is to have the owners sell. 

For those wondering, breakdown of the charges below:

 - 54 charges of failure to provide accurate financial reports from 2009 to 2018.

- 14 charges for failure to provide accurate player/manager wages from the same period. 

- 5 charges of breaching FFP rules under UEFA guidelines. 

- 7 charges relating to breaching PSR under Premier League guidelines. 

- 35 charges for refusal to cooperate with investigations. 

 

I'm hearing the actual charges were even raised to 130 from 115...

6 hours ago, Sconnie Blue said:

For those wondering, breakdown of the charges below:

 - 54 charges of failure to provide accurate financial reports from 2009 to 2018.

- 14 charges for failure to provide accurate player/manager wages from the same period. 

- 5 charges of breaching FFP rules under UEFA guidelines. 

- 7 charges relating to breaching PSR under Premier League guidelines. 

- 35 charges for refusal to cooperate with investigations. 

 

I'm hearing the actual charges were even raised to 130 from 115...

Just hoping, if they are punished, it is for future seasons, not past ones.

I would personally detest it if titles were award out to second place sides from those campaigns City won titles. What is the point, how do you celebrate that? 

If they are guilty punish them in the present and future, whatever that looks like. Let sides win things on merit not technicalities.

On 10/12/2024 at 04:18, Sconnie Blue said:

And now we wait. Said it a while back but if City are found guilty, the only appropriate punishment is to have the owners sell. 

That is not possible, it is outside the PL's power. The PL cannot currently take action to force divestment, even if an owner is guilty of serious crime. One of the reasons a government football regulator has been proposed. 

48 minutes ago, SydneyChelsea said:

That is not possible, it is outside the PL's power. The PL cannot currently take action to force divestment, even if an owner is guilty of serious crime. One of the reasons a government football regulator has been proposed. 

No that's what the UK government is for when they get a bee in their bonnet and try and score political points at our expense.

I have a weird crush on Lisa Nandy so I am all in favour of a football regulator. 

On 08/12/2024 at 10:56, petre ispirescu said:

 

 

 

Weird posts that I do not really agree with.

You might have a case if all these guys were unknown entities. But they are not. Especially Boehly and Walter.

The current Chelsea owners are Clearlake Capital (Eghbali & Feliciano) + Todd Boehly & Mark Walter (Guggenheim Capital) and Hansjorg Wyss.

Boehly and Walter are part of Guggenheim Capital, a relatively unknown entity that in 2012 bought the LA Dodgers. The legendary Magic Johnson is part of Guggenheim Capital as well and was closely involved in that deal.

Mark Walter is the supreme boss at the Dodgers. There is an interesting story told by Magic Johnson from when they bought the Dodgers in 2012. At first, Magic Johnson had a short term vision, wanted immediate success and to follow the Yankees pattern by spending big. But Walter, the big boss, and Stan Kasten, the baseball guy, did not agree with that and told Johnson that this is a long term project.

Since Guggenheim Capital took over the franchise in 2012, the Dodgers have won the World Series twice and the NL West title in 12 out of 13 seasons. They also played another two World Series Finals in 2017 and 2018, which they lost.

They took a similar path to what Chelsea are going through now as Boehly, Walter and others opted to first take care of other areas such as the minor league system and the development of youth. It's only in 2020 when they started to go big in the market for superstars such as Betts, Freeman, Ohtani, Yamamoto, Glasnow. They are the current World Series winners.

Now if these guys were to milk every penny out of that franchise, then you would have a valid point. But they will soon enter into their 13th year as the LA Dodgers owners and they are now investing more and more money, establishing the franchise as the no. 1 in that league. Whereas the Yankees, who were Magic Johnson's franchise to look to as success, have not won a single World Series since Guggenheim Capital took over. And they did not even make it to a Final up until this season when the Dodgers beat them 4-1.

IMHO if we are to follow the same path as Boehly, Walter and the others took at the Dodgers, I think we are in safe hands. It will require patience and years of development in several other areas, too and currently things start to be looking good.

All of a sudden this so called "project" does not look like a circus anymore and the haters of past seasons have now become fans. 

From the LA Times...

 

"Todd Boehly, one of the owners, said he has no doubt that Guggenheim will profit from the Dodgers. The ownership is poised to negotiate a record-setting local television contract that could bring three times what Guggenheim paid for the team."

On 08/12/2024 at 10:56, petre ispirescu said:

 

 

 

Weird posts that I do not really agree with.

You might have a case if all these guys were unknown entities. But they are not. Especially Boehly and Walter.

The current Chelsea owners are Clearlake Capital (Eghbali & Feliciano) + Todd Boehly & Mark Walter (Guggenheim Capital) and Hansjorg Wyss.

Boehly and Walter are part of Guggenheim Capital, a relatively unknown entity that in 2012 bought the LA Dodgers. The legendary Magic Johnson is part of Guggenheim Capital as well and was closely involved in that deal.

Mark Walter is the supreme boss at the Dodgers. There is an interesting story told by Magic Johnson from when they bought the Dodgers in 2012. At first, Magic Johnson had a short term vision, wanted immediate success and to follow the Yankees pattern by spending big. But Walter, the big boss, and Stan Kasten, the baseball guy, did not agree with that and told Johnson that this is a long term project.

Since Guggenheim Capital took over the franchise in 2012, the Dodgers have won the World Series twice and the NL West title in 12 out of 13 seasons. They also played another two World Series Finals in 2017 and 2018, which they lost.

They took a similar path to what Chelsea are going through now as Boehly, Walter and others opted to first take care of other areas such as the minor league system and the development of youth. It's only in 2020 when they started to go big in the market for superstars such as Betts, Freeman, Ohtani, Yamamoto, Glasnow. They are the current World Series winners.

Now if these guys were to milk every penny out of that franchise, then you would have a valid point. But they will soon enter into their 13th year as the LA Dodgers owners and they are now investing more and more money, establishing the franchise as the no. 1 in that league. Whereas the Yankees, who were Magic Johnson's franchise to look to as success, have not won a single World Series since Guggenheim Capital took over. And they did not even make it to a Final up until this season when the Dodgers beat them 4-1.

IMHO if we are to follow the same path as Boehly, Walter and the others took at the Dodgers, I think we are in safe hands. It will require patience and years of development in several other areas, too and currently things start to be looking good.

All of a sudden this so called "project" does not look like a circus anymore and the haters of past seasons have now become fans. 

Again, LA Times 2012..

 

"In reality, Boehly said, the Dodgers are an investment for the insurance companies — one that will be repaid over time, with interest, rather than with $1 billion from the television deal."

On 04/12/2024 at 10:37, evissy said:

Nope. I am sorry mate but the way I see it we have done things in a new way. No PR either. 

Tell me which club lets say in England changed the owner, changed almost the entire staff, sold almost every player (worth of selling) and replaced them with 18-21 year old players. And to add to this season the plan was to create a big squad that can handle all the cups and Club World Cup. We did it and we are progressing as planned.

They also said specifically they'd do 4 transfer windows and would use the exact amount of money they used. That money spent was I think in the terms which the sale was granted by Roman. Roman wanted to make sure the first team squad is taken care of. 

That 4 window period is over and we have completely changed the squad with, let me remind you, YOUNG TALENT. For the young talent to be the right talent is up to a grand plan and smart decisions. Our sporting directors have done well there. You can't deny that. What is less said is we have a group that is growing at the same age bracket to be future champions and winners. Not the old mix and match group.

Maresca is also part of their decisions as was Pochettino who did well with a young squad with ton of injuries. 

Maresca just said in his last presser he thinks Chelsea with this squad will dominate English football for 5-10 years. He wants to lead the group to that success. He said he told this to the owners before he was signed and he still thinks so. I think that is encouraging and goes along with the progress we see on the pitch as well.

 

The money for transfers can only come from the club's income, not from any promised money from the ownership.

Don't get me wrong, I'm delighted with the actual football team, but structurally, with BlueCo over £600m in debt, extra long contracts, and amortisation taking out £200m a year from our income , it could be a worry.

I probably feel differently to most on here because I lived thru the years when we came close to losing Stamford Bridge and possibly the club because of our then Property Developer owners.

Only saved by a combination of Bates and the unlikely property crash that ruined the then owners. I'm still haunted by the memories of it , so please excuse my constant paranoia about our current owners !!!

45 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

Again, LA Times 2012..

 

"In reality, Boehly said, the Dodgers are an investment for the insurance companies — one that will be repaid over time, with interest, rather than with $1 billion from the television deal."

I did not say that they won't take any money out from the club, as a matter of fact I have no idea what their plan is in that matter.

I just made a comparison with the Dodgers and the way they chose to build up that project. Even though they invested a lot of money in the first 7-8 years, it did not stop them to move to the next level in terms of investment in that roster and start signing superstars from 2020 to this day.

If they go by the same pattern with Chelsea, there is no reason to believe they will abandon their initial plan towards a long term project of smart transfers. And expensive, if needed.

 

Edited December 11, 20241 yr by petre ispirescu

21 minutes ago, petre ispirescu said:

I did not say that they won't take any money out from the club, as a matter of fact I have no idea what their plan is in that matter.

I just made a comparison with the Dodgers and the way they chose to build up that project. Even though they invested a lot of money in the first 7-8 years, it did not stop them to move to the next level in terms of investment in that roster and start signing superstars from 2020 to this day.

If they go by the same pattern with Chelsea, there is no reason to believe they will abandon their initial plan towards a long term project of smart transfers. And expensive, if needed.

 

Thanks for your reply mate.

Well, they can not invest their own funds in buying players or paying wages because it's forbidden under our PSR regulations.

They also can't pay out dividends, or trade shares , or pay themselves any management fees until the 10 year embargo is up, and as an Equity Investment fund exists to profit from investments, it's difficult to see how they will do it at Chelsea isn't it?

Anyway, the football is superb, anything else tends to be forgotten thankfully, let's hope it continues.

Come on you BLUES!

 

 

Edited December 11, 20241 yr by The Rising Sun
Info

Tbh, I have long term (15yr) investments via my bank that I can't touch till after its over and when they finished the first time I renewed then for another 15. I think it's similar with those investors.

They know its a long term deal but if they are going to nearly double their money or get a decent return in that time, why wouldn't they reinvest again for another 10yrs let's say.

Maybe after the initial 10 yrs they will open it up to other investors too.

But either way they need to make sure its successful and very attractive to invest in...

 

Personally, I'm not worried about any of that from the owners. Investments, financial side of things, etc...

The only thing that worries about the owners or board, etc...is IF they get involved with the footy side again!

Big IF though, because I hope that time has come and gone now that they have placed a footy structure in place. Especially no impulse buys by them pls.

17 minutes ago, Simplymo said:

Tbh, I have long term (15yr) investments via my bank that I can't touch till after its over and when they finished the first time I renewed then for another 15. I think it's similar with those investors.

They know its a long term deal but if they are going to nearly double their money or get a decent return in that time, why wouldn't they reinvest again for another 10yrs let's say.

Maybe after the initial 10 yrs they will open it up to other investors too.

But either way they need to make sure its successful and very attractive to invest in...

 

Personally, I'm not worried about any of that from the owners. Investments, financial side of things, etc...

The only thing that worries about the owners or board, etc...is IF they get involved with the footy side again!

Big IF though, because I hope that time has come and gone now that they have placed a footy structure in place. Especially no impulse buys by them pls.

The investment they've made is the purchase price . They can't invest their funds in player transfers, wages etc.

They can use their funds to build us a massive new stadium though.

57 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

 

They can use their funds to build us a massive new stadium though.

This is the biggie I'm waiting for...

I have no idea which way it goes, or what's going to happen, etc. It's the subject I'm constantly searching for online. I know it's sad right...lol

It's going to be years away from now. You'll have plenty of notice.

I've been assessing our transfer business over the past several years. The last two years our business in the market has got substantially better I have to say, made some great sales, bought some good players, some at absolute bargains too. 

Sancho if he carries on will be an absolute steal at 20 odd million, and got two young superstars joining the team next season, things are looking positive. But we do need to invest wisely at the back and keep the track record going. 

I would say the only bad signing we've made this season is KDH, but at least it wasn't ridiculously silly money. The problem with that signing is that we're not going to make a profit on him, makes the Gallagher transfer look a bit of a waste. 

On 11/12/2024 at 21:00, Simplymo said:

This is the biggie I'm waiting for...

I have no idea which way it goes, or what's going to happen, etc. It's the subject I'm constantly searching for online. I know it's sad right...lol

Despite all the extra income from their 60,000 stadium, Spurs still don't splash out. Solanke at £65m is their record signing, beating the £63m 2019 record signing of the Ndombele.

And poor ol' Ange is struggling to put a team out and blaming Werner for not being very good!!

🤣🤣

12 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

Despite all the extra income from their 60,000 stadium, Spurs still don't splash out. Solanke at £65m is their record signing, beating the £63m 2019 record signing of the Ndombele.

And poor ol' Ange is struggling to put a team out and blaming Werner for not being very good!!

🤣🤣

I think that's down to levy though to an extent. All I hear is spuds fans moaning they have no money because the owners take the lions share or only believe in fixed assets like the stadium and won't risk money on players and stuff. That just doesn't sound like our owners from what we know/read so far.

I truly believe our owners can do better in rgds to income from let's say an 80,000 seater at the Earls Court site compared to the spuds stadium in "norf" london imho.

I also have this feeling its not much of an improvement to renovate the bridge for 60k ppl and expect to make the same profits that the 80k stadium and "village" will make. Although I do love the look of the "cathedral" plans more than the Earls Court village plans that I've seen so far. Just looks more aesthetically pleasing compared to the "village".

 

 

My head, logic, business mind, etc. says Earls Court is the way to go, no question, but my heart cries for the bridge. Its a hard one tbh. The only way I can find a compromise is if we still keep the bridge and it becomes the home of Chelsea women's club. Especially now they are a separate entity from the mens. 

Maybe they are biding their time for the women's game to grow even more before buying the bridge from the men's team. To justify all the financial legalities, etc...or to make an argument towards that direction. 

🤷‍♂️

 

*I'm deliberately leaving out all the other stuff from our side like will the CPO allow any of this or that. Thats a whole other matter. But a home for the womens team like the bridge will help with all that stuff, as it keeps it still Chels. But thats a whole different post.

 

Edited December 14, 20241 yr by Simplymo