1 minute ago, The Rising Sun said:

We started the season £500m in debt because of the loan Todd and Clearlake took out to finance transfers etc

The debt is not under Chelsea

1 minute ago, abister1 said:

GP isn't fit to dine on the same table as Rodgers

I reckon Rodgers is a good fit for us , knows the club, at Leicester despite injuries, no money for transfers and losing players to other clubs, he gets them.playing decent football

42 minutes ago, Chelsbear said:

lt would be even more bonkers to just keep the manager despite the ludicrous results just because some people say we have spent hundreds of millions a few months ago

That's not what it's about. It's not their money. They couldn't give a toss. 

They are more concerned about winning the virtuous popularity contest at the local boozer during their regular catch ups with the regular crowd. Ah see, we can also give a manager time.

Some people are so averse to change and anything that disrupts the air or illusion of stability they have dreamed up as bad. Not necessarily bad for the club but for their own warped reasoning. 

3 minutes ago, cfcforeverfan said:

They are not depending on making money from year to year operation

 

They bought us for 3b and they want to sell it for 6b in 10 years, which will be a success to them

a couple hundred millions loss in operation is not their concern, as long as they can sell it big at the end. 

Would not surprise me in the slightest if all of their project targets/objectives are financial in terms of building the "value" of the club. Trophies, titles are probably secondary to that. It is a very different ownership model for sure. I don't think it would concern them if we won nothing for 10 years, just so long as the business was worth £6+ billion by then ... 

4 minutes ago, cfcforeverfan said:

The debt is not under Chelsea

Yeah I've heard that too.

There is apparently a limit to how much debt can be put on the club, but I don't believe American financial investors or Todd are giving charitable donations to an English football club either 

20 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

Dream on.

The new owners don't want to go down the old route.

It's a project, a very long term one by the looks of it, so as long as they can eventually sell the club for a big profit their investors will be happy even if we aren't.

They will when we get relegated by Potter. No sane investor will touch a club in the Championship or that doesnt play in Europe. Playing in Europe makes the club profitable

5 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

I reckon Rodgers is a good fit for us , knows the club, at Leicester despite injuries, no money for transfers and losing players to other clubs, he gets them.playing decent football

Reminds of how a certain manager did taking over at Brighton. Whether we accept it or not, the ENTIRE fabric of the club changed when Toddy B took over. It's going to be a painful process, obviously, but it has to be given time. 

3 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Would not surprise me in the slightest if all of their project targets/objectives are financial in terms of building the "value" of the club. Trophies, titles are probably secondary to that. It is a very different ownership model for sure. I don't think it would concern them if we won nothing for 10 years, just so long as the business was worth £6+ billion by then ... 

well winning trophies is the quickest and the most secure way to increase your brand value

 

Manchester United is the most popular club in the world not because they are wearing red but because they are so dominant for so long, same as Liverpool in the 70s and 80s (Although that generation is probably close to dying)

2 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Would not surprise me in the slightest if all of their project targets/objectives are financial in terms of building the "value" of the club. Trophies, titles are probably secondary to that. It is a very different ownership model for sure. I don't think it would concern them if we won nothing for 10 years, just so long as the business was worth £6+ billion by then ... 

 

2 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Would not surprise me in the slightest if all of their project targets/objectives are financial in terms of building the "value" of the club. Trophies, titles are probably secondary to that. It is a very different ownership model for sure. I don't think it would concern them if we won nothing for 10 years, just so long as the business was worth £6+ billion by then ... 

The only reason why Chelsea was worth 3 billion is because of all the trophies it has. After a while the new owners will realise that winning trophies do matter. With the winning mentality Roman instilled in the Chelsea fans, I dont think we the fans will be quiet if Chelsea becomes like Spurs and its the fans that add value to the club

4 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

Yeah I've heard that too.

There is apparently a limit to how much debt can be put on the club, but I don't believe American financial investors or Todd are giving charitable donations to an English football club either 

Putting debts on your team devalues it, it has no purpose if their wish is making money in selling

1 minute ago, Edjmendy said:

They will when we get relegated by Potter. No sane investor will touch a club in the Championship or that doesnt play in Europe. Playing in Europe makes the club profitable

The investors own the club. They own us no matter what happens.

Why is everyone going mental about the possibility of us being relegated ? Jesus Christ get a grip.

Anyway under the last 20 seasons of success do you know how many seasons we made a profit ?

2 minutes ago, cfcforeverfan said:

Putting debts on your team devalues it, it has no purpose if their wish is making money in selling

So Todd takes a . £500m hit out of his own pocket and his profit when he sells up ?

2 minutes ago, cfcforeverfan said:

well winning trophies is the quickest and the most secure way to increase your brand value

 

Manchester United is the most popular club in the world not because they are wearing red but because they are so dominant for so long, same as Liverpool in the 70s and 80s (Although that generation is probably close to dying)

I remember Manchester United as a hugely popular club in the 1970s and 1980s even when they weren't winning anything apart from the odd FA Cup ... practically all my school friends supported Man United, and this was all way before Ferguson. 

I do broadly agree with you, though it remains to be seen how all that resonates with Boehly and Clearlake. I think they will have a multitude of ideas that are essentially new territory for a football club, and more aligned to a US Sports franchise model.

 

5 minutes ago, Edjmendy said:

 

The only reason why Chelsea was worth 3 billion is because of all the trophies it has. After a while the new owners will realise that winning trophies do matter. With the winning mentality Roman instilled in the Chelsea fans, I dont think we the fans will be quiet if Chelsea becomes like Spurs and its the fans that add value to the club

The clubs value had nothing to do with the trophies.

It was based on income and projected incomes.

Those trophies were won at a  cost of £1.5 billion debt attached to the club

8 minutes ago, cfcforeverfan said:

well winning trophies is the quickest and the most secure way to increase your brand value

 

Manchester United is the most popular club in the world not because they are wearing red but because they are so dominant for so long, same as Liverpool in the 70s and 80s (Although that generation is probably close to dying)

Newcastle won f**k all ever, and yet they still attracted the richest investors in the sport. 

26 minutes ago, TheCeleryKing said:

I just cannot get a read on how the players feel about him. IF the players like him, I am all in favour of him. If they enjoy his management style. Are they enjoying going to training? do they respect his ideas? Is he a visionary manager that the players are learning from?   How do the players feel about Potter? I got no read on this.  I dont have a sense that they are loving Potter time

Oh my god. I think I'm going to take a break from this place. The amount of rationale people try to bring into this equation is beyond normal. 

My brain is actually going to explode if I don't protect it from the insanity I'm seeing here. 

Players going about their job whilst paid handsomely are who we should consider before knowing if its right to allow a man that his best position in the league as 9th continue doing the poor job he is doing? 

A manager that the only reason he wss talked up for English manager job is because English managers globally are so poor that with a win percentage of less than 40% at his previous club he was best of a bad bunch 

That an American thought the best way to placate English fans after buying an English club and get them on side after firing a popular manager was to hire an English manager that was highly rated. Question is highly rated compared to who. Hired with no real competitive recruitment process with the job offer all signed, sealed, delivered within 48 hrs. 

It was a PR move that has backfired and will be righted. They just won't lose cash by cutting him loose now so will wait till about the 9th or 10th month for him to fail his performance clauses. At the current rate of extremely poor performance it might be somewhere around the 7th or 8th month it becomes mathematically impossible to meet such. 

Do you for one second think that GP believes he can do the type of job that men, good managers like we have had in the past, have done. 

Nae chance. 

 

 

Edited February 19, 20233 yr by abister1

1 minute ago, abister1 said:

Oh my god. I think I'm going to take a break from this place. The amount of rationale people try to bring into this equation is beyond normal. 

My brain is actually going to explode if I don't protect it from the insanity I'm seeing here. 

Players going about their job whilst paid handsomely are who we should consider before knowing if its right to allow a man that his best position in the league is 9th continue doing the poor job he is doing? 

A manager that the only reason he wss talked up for English manager job is because English managers globally are so poor that with a win percentage of less than 40% at his previous club he was best of a bad bunch 

That an American thought the best way to placate English fans after buying an English club and get them on side after firing a popular manager was to hire an English manager that was highly rated. Question is highly rated compared to who. Hired with no real competitive recruitment process with the job offer all signed, sealed, delivered within 48 hrs. 

It was a PR move that has backfired and will be righted. They just won't lose cash by cutting him loose now so will wait till about the 9th or 10th month for him to fail his performance clauses. At the current rate of extremely poor performance it might be somewhere around the 7th or 8th month it becomes mathematically impossible to meet such. 

Do you for one second think that GP believes he can do the type of job that men, good managers like we have had in the past, have done. 

Nae chance. 

 

 

None of us are bothered about a managers nationality. Not one person I know.

How you've got this "English" issue with the club is bizarre 

15 minutes ago, ross91690 said:

Reminds of how a certain manager did taking over at Brighton. Whether we accept it or not, the ENTIRE fabric of the club changed when Toddy B took over. It's going to be a painful process, obviously, but it has to be given time. 

Rodgers took Leicester to 5th two seasons in a row, his record is far better than Potter's.

15 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

So Todd takes a . £500m hit out of his own pocket and his profit when he sells up ?

it is under his company, not on himself, maybe his investment company or sth

 

It's actually going to become quite difficult to win trophies. Much harder than it has been in the Roman years, due to the sheer number of rival clubs that are now equally well, or even better, funded by their friendly neighbourhood billionaires owner groups.

There are only 4 pots up for grabs every year, and one of those also has competition from all the top clubs in Europe.

I don't think any model of value growth will rely on stocking the trophy cabinet, but they will for sure expect us to be dining at the top table consistently, in order to attract the TV and Commercial Revenue that will be the big project plays ... 

1 minute ago, cfcforeverfan said:

it is under his company, not on himself, maybe his investment company or sth

 

Do if winning trophies is crucial to the investors making money from our club, why is it then that they don't seem to be bothered ?

And why are some of you more concerned about our investors wealth than they seem to be ?

 

12 minutes ago, coco said:

Newcastle won f**k all ever, and yet they still attracted the richest investors in the sport. 

1. The owner doesnt seem to care money that much as long as they can use it to sportwash them

 

2. Newcastle undervalued a lot given their history and size of fanbase, probably because of the mismanagement of Ashley, so it is a profitable business to them in the long run

1 minute ago, Sexyfootball said:

It's actually going to become quite difficult to win trophies. Much harder than it has been in the Roman years, due to the sheer number of rival clubs that are now equally well, or even better, funded by their friendly neighbourhood billionaires owner groups.

There are only 4 pots up for grabs every year, and one of those also has competition from all the top clubs in Europe.

I don't think any model of value growth will rely on stocking the trophy cabinet, but they will for sure expect us to be dining at the top table consistently, in order to attract the TV and Commercial Revenue that will be the big project plays ... 

It's why I was such a big fan of Tuchel, we might not have been able to compete with City in the league but we were capable of beating every top side in Europe. We had a chance at winning pretty much every trophy. Meanwhile under Potter we're celebrating holding our own against Dortmund.

11 minutes ago, abister1 said:

Oh my god. I think I'm going to take a break from this place. The amount of rationale people try to bring into this equation is beyond normal. 

My brain is actually going to explode if I don't protect it from the insanity I'm seeing here. 

Players going about their job whilst paid handsomely are who we should consider before knowing if its right to allow a man that his best position in the league as 9th continue doing the poor job he is doing? 

A manager that the only reason he wss talked up for English manager job is because English managers globally are so poor that with a win percentage of less than 40% at his previous club he was best of a bad bunch 

That an American thought the best way to placate English fans after buying an English club and get them on side after firing a popular manager was to hire an English manager that was highly rated. Question is highly rated compared to who. Hired with no real competitive recruitment process with the job offer all signed, sealed, delivered within 48 hrs. 

It was a PR move that has backfired and will be righted. They just won't lose cash by cutting him loose now so will wait till about the 9th or 10th month for him to fail his performance clauses. At the current rate of extremely poor performance it might be somewhere around the 7th or 8th month it becomes mathematically impossible to meet such. 

Do you for one second think that GP believes he can do the type of job that men, good managers like we have had in the past, have done. 

Nae chance. 

 

 

Frustrating isn't it, I've never seen the standards so low. There are people on here who are okay if we get relegated meanwhile it wasn't two seasons ago Tuchel had to win every game 6-0, every trophy, get the keys to the city, shag the queen, or he needs to go because it's not good enough. Thankfully for his sake, he ended up winning the Champions League, good boy Tommy you bought a bit more time! 

But I completely agree with you, it boils down to an English bias, if Potter was French you wouldn't get this weird support and excuse-making that so many love to give to him. As much as they want to deny it, it's a reality. 

 

18 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

The clubs value had nothing to do with the trophies.

It was based on income and projected incomes.

Those trophies were won at a  cost of £1.5 billion debt attached to the club

your income can only increase if your popularity increase and getting more fans

 

keep losing wont get you more fans, because a lot of fans are glory hunters