2 hours ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

The Moreria business was all done via the sister club we owned, so seems silly to include this as good business.

Angelo we were saved by Saudi. We can’t rely on this every window.

Casadei we barely broke even and certainly made a loss when you factor in the wages we paid for him, regardless of what it says for FFP/PSR. Owners are here to make a profit on the bottom line, this won’t be a success in their eyes.

Hutchinson we did well with. Opportunistic free transfer, let’s do more of these rather than wasting tens of millions on nobodies.

Burstow a waste of time. See above regards Casadei.

So getting Moreira on a free from Benfica wasn’t good business ? Getting a loan fee from Lyon wasn’t good business and selling him for a fee doesn’t count because it was Strasbourg. Ok yep you are right it was poor business.

Angelo yes was a decent fee , surprising maybe but wasn’t it good business to turn a profit and insert a significant sell on fee ( said to be circa 15%) ? Clearly not in your eyes but I wonder if you are able, certainly not willing, to see the matter the good business it was.

Casadei in terms of fee we paid against fee received was broadly neutral and of course he was paid . Sadly he didn’t settle but the fact that the club rated him and managed to get a 25%sell on clause suggests compromise from Chelsea in terms of reducing the fee gambling that the true return will be down the line.

It’s important that we don’t loose sight of these sell on clauses they are often extremely lucrative.

Burstow clearly isn’t a PL player but the fee we paid was recouped . It was a gamble bringing him in and that gamble didn’t come off but even just breaking even ( which we did slightly better than that) wasn’t a disaster.

As I pointed out to date we can only assess all these young players in terms of the monetary success. To date we only have numbers for 5 and by my calculation . It’s far from disappointing

But then I am open minded whereas some are desperate for the club to fail

1 hour ago, terraloon said:

So getting Moreira on a free from Benfica wasn’t good business ? Getting a loan fee from Lyon wasn’t good business and selling him for a fee doesn’t count because it was Strasbourg. Ok yep you are right it was poor business.

Angelo yes was a decent fee , surprising maybe but wasn’t it good business to turn a profit and insert a significant sell on fee ( said to be circa 15%) ? Clearly not in your eyes but I wonder if you are able, certainly not willing, to see the matter the good business it was.

Casadei in terms of fee we paid against fee received was broadly neutral and of course he was paid . Sadly he didn’t settle but the fact that the club rated him and managed to get a 25%sell on clause suggests compromise from Chelsea in terms of reducing the fee gambling that the true return will be down the line.

It’s important that we don’t loose sight of these sell on clauses they are often extremely lucrative.

Burstow clearly isn’t a PL player but the fee we paid was recouped . It was a gamble bringing him in and that gamble didn’t come off but even just breaking even ( which we did slightly better than that) wasn’t a disaster.

As I pointed out to date we can only assess all these young players in terms of the monetary success. To date we only have numbers for 5 and by my calculation . It’s far from disappointing

But then I am open minded whereas some are desperate for the club to fail

They sold the player to themselves, so yes it doesn’t count.

It was good business in the same way Oscar to China was good business. Saudi deals won’t be there to save us every time. Angelo could quite as easily gone the way of Washington.

Wasted 2 years of ours and Casadei’s time for a potential future fee? lol

if we can only judge transfer success on money received why are you mentioning a sell on fee as a positive? For all we knows these players spend the rest of their career there and we waste our time. Or move on for free.

No one wants the club to fail, but the warning signs are glaring and burying your head in the sand won’t change that.

1 hour ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

They sold the player to themselves, so yes it doesn’t count.

It was good business in the same way Oscar to China was good business. Saudi deals won’t be there to save us every time. Angelo could quite as easily gone the way of Washington.

Wasted 2 years of ours and Casadei’s time for a potential future fee? lol

if we can only judge transfer success on money received why are you mentioning a sell on fee as a positive? For all we knows these players spend the rest of their career there and we waste our time. Or move on for free.

No one wants the club to fail, but the warning signs are glaring and burying your head in the sand won’t change that

You must be right about selling or buying a player to Strasbourg as no doubt we have told the PL and EUFA that sorry the £18 million we paid for Sarr doesn’t count . Not !

Casadei hadn’t been expected to leave , the club valued him highly indeed when he came back from Leicester there were plans to give him game time and remain as part of the squad.

As for mentioning a fee as a positive I did so because you were measuring the exact reverse but when it came to Casadei Chelsea have adopted an approach that City, that Real and Barca employ namely you accept a lower initial fee with significant sell on. It’s a trade off , a gamble but if it comes off then it’s liable to deliver far more than accepting a slightly higher initial fee as we did when we sold Lukaku to Everton, KDB and Salah.

Look it’s pretty obvious from your posts in general that you have are view everything thing that those in charge at the club as being a negative. There are positives but sorry you won’t see them if it smacked you in the face.

RA transformed the club but along the way he made significant mistakes particularly when it came to transfers . Far too many harp back to his tenure. Those days have gone and will never return.

18 hours ago, Clown Lake said:

The directors are actually doing a phenomenal job. It is not the job we want them to do, however this is the task the owners have given them. I want you all to take a moment and realize why we are buying young players.

Let's view what we are currently doing with Strasbourg. To realize how all of our signings are being utilized the perfect example lies with the Strasbourg striker Emegha that we have just bought and loaning back immediately, joining us in 2026. The reason we are doing these types of signings from Strasbourg is simple, money and loan slots. We buy him now when his value is low and have a pre-agreement for 2026. This allows us to keep him at Strasbourg without keeping one of our loan slots occupied. Now to the money. If we buy him now, we have bought him at current value. Next year, it is very likely his value will have increased therefore we have bought him on a cheap compared to buying him when his value is high. If it does not work out, we can flip him for a small profit. If it works out, well we have a good striker for very cheap. This is a win-win for us, not so much for Strasbourg money wise, however they do keep him for another year. He has been great for them and will be playing in Europe this year.

This is the task for our directors, set by our owners. They are not fools, they are executing perfectly. The problem is our owners.

Herein lies the pin to our balloon of financial portfolio management. for example, Omari Kellyman is worth fck all squared.

12 hours ago, Bob stark said:

I don't understand this. Dortmund can ask whatever number for gittens. They can ask 500 m, it is their right.

You will blacklist a sd/club only if they violate a deal after you have somekind of agreement.

The point being made was that we were quite accommodating with Milan in our dealings with them, particularly with Pulisic and RLC. So its a bit raw for them to play fck abouts with us now over Maignan.

I suspect that we have bent over backwards (or possibly forwards), in our dealings with Dortmund thus far with regards to Chukwuemeka.

13 hours ago, Bob stark said:

I don't understand this. Dortmund can ask whatever number for gittens. They can ask 500 m, it is their right.

You will blacklist a sd/club only if they violate a deal after you have somekind of agreement.

He wants to leave, so that wouldn’t be a reasonable fee, other clubs seem to manage reasonable fees, but we can’t after all the charity we’ve been doing for Milan & Dortmund. We simply have the worst negotiators, the only other theory was that the payment structures were too ridiculous. These two clubs have a one way relationship with us.

2 hours ago, terraloon said:

You must be right about selling or buying a player to Strasbourg as no doubt we have told the PL and EUFA that sorry the £18 million we paid for Sarr doesn’t count . Not !

Casadei hadn’t been expected to leave , the club valued him highly indeed when he came back from Leicester there were plans to give him game time and remain as part of the squad.

As for mentioning a fee as a positive I did so because you were measuring the exact reverse but when it came to Casadei Chelsea have adopted an approach that City, that Real and Barca employ namely you accept a lower initial fee with significant sell on. It’s a trade off , a gamble but if it comes off then it’s liable to deliver far more than accepting a slightly higher initial fee as we did when we sold Lukaku to Everton, KDB and Salah.

Look it’s pretty obvious from your posts in general that you have are view everything thing that those in charge at the club as being a negative. There are positives but sorry you won’t see them if it smacked you in the face.

RA transformed the club but along the way he made significant mistakes particularly when it came to transfers . Far too many harp back to his tenure. Those days have gone and will never return.

We’re talking about selling players, not buying them. We can talk about Sarr in a few years when we sell him back to Strasbourg for 12M and sold Acheampong to cover our losses.

If Casadei was so highly rated we would have kept him or we would have sold him for a profit. We did neither.

You think it’s just me that’s negative? Wake up and smell the roses baby boy.

All very well turning a profit on those 5 young players, but what's the point when you've already wiped it out with the losses on Koulibaly and Aubameyang ?

35 minutes ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

We’re talking about selling players, not buying them. We can talk about Sarr in a few years when we sell him back to Strasbourg for 12M and sold Acheampong to cover our losses.

If Casadei was so highly rated we would have kept him or we would have sold him for a profit. We did neither.

You think it’s just me that’s negative? Wake up and smell the roses baby boy.

Your negativity shines through like a beacon!

Irrespective is there any call to refer to me as baby boy ? Haven’t been one for many a year and its certainly not a pet name of mine so I can only worry as to why you use such a phrase.

Yes you were talking about selling players because that suited your narrative. It’s just a shame that you can’t grasp the inconsistency of your point that it doesn’t count when Chelsea sell a player to Strasbourg but it doesn’t when Strasbourg sell a player to Chelsea.

Keeping any player that wants to leave, as Casadei did, will only lead to problems. He wanted to go back to Italy so the options no doubt would have been limited. Irrespective the deal in accounting terms did lead to a profit add the fact that negotiating a significant % sell on was almost certainty the best offer that at that point in time was out there. I guess you would have got a better deal so pray tell me how you would have achieved that ?

Near enough all your posts are doom and gloom. I just don’t understand if things are that bad why support the club?

The current owners are there for the long term. They took over an almost impossible situation. A club that was only days away from extinction . A club where player after player were being paid way over the odds.A team that was in dire need of a rebuild. A club that off field was total chaos yet some and I guess your in that number and ironically in need of doing the exact thing you suggest and that is to wake up and smell the coffee.

Pointing your rifle at the sporting directors, and ignoring the ownership, is a like shooting the monkey for following the organ grinders tune.

20 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

All very well turning a profit on those 5 young players, but what's the point when you've already wiped it out with the losses on Koulibaly and Aubameyang ?

No one is doubting that there have been some big mistakes when signing players but Koulibaly and PEA weren’t youngsters when signed both were clearly past their sell by date.

The book loss for Koulibaly was €7.5 million.Bought for €41.9 asset value when sold for €23 m was €30.5 m

PEA bought for €12 m on a 2 year deal.Sold a year later for €4 million when his asset value was €6mill

Two terrible signings that came about through naivety, panic the third stupid signing was Sterling and that problem is yet to be resolved. But the fact is that when you compare with some of the significant sums lost on players like Lukaku, like Kepa, like Drinwater, like Barclay makes the sums the losses the current owners purchases have endured is negligible even when you measure over the same sort of time scale.

One of the first task the owners had to do was compare asset values of players against mid contract valuations and in a blink of an eye they had to write off £120+ million.of players at the club at the point of takeover. Thankfully most of those players have now been moved on the only two that remain are Kepa and Chillwell.

I don’t know where all this the club was in chaos talk before the new owners has come from….. well I do, it’s come from the new owners.

We were European and world champions and Marina had just won best CEO in Europe.

Of course mistakes were made. Every transfer has a risk. Even when buying top players. Those mistakes were easier to forgive because we knew that the club were trying to improve the team and win trophies. That’s all RA cared about and wanted.

My problem is with the SD’s rather than the owners right now. The owners have been sold on this model the SD have implemented. The owners are putting up the money. The SD’s are spending it badly.

They are called the first team for a reason, fix the first team first. Then invest in prospects, that’s all we are saying. Are we interested in competing for top honours or just turning a profit is a legitimate question at this stage and it doesn’t make you negative to ask it.

1 hour ago, terraloon said:

No one is doubting that there have been some big mistakes when signing players but Koulibaly and PEA weren’t youngsters when signed both were clearly past their sell by date.

The book loss for Koulibaly was €7.5 million.Bought for €41.9 asset value when sold for €23 m was €30.5 m

PEA bought for €12 m on a 2 year deal.Sold a year later for €4 million when his asset value was €6mill

Two terrible signings that came about through naivety, panic the third stupid signing was Sterling and that problem is yet to be resolved. But the fact is that when you compare with some of the significant sums lost on players like Lukaku, like Kepa, like Drinwater, like Barclay makes the sums the losses the current owners purchases have endured is negligible even when you measure over the same sort of time scale.

One of the first task the owners had to do was compare asset values of players against mid contract valuations and in a blink of an eye they had to write off £120+ million.of players at the club at the point of takeover. Thankfully most of those players have now been moved on the only two that remain are Kepa and Chillwell.

I'm pretty sure Aubameyang left on a free.

And whatever the "book value" was, we bought Koulibaly for 41.9m and sold him for 23.0m (as per Transfermarkt) so that's 18.9m of real money that's gone ... not 7.5m of accountancy games.

10 hours ago, terraloon said:

Your negativity shines through like a beacon!

Irrespective is there any call to refer to me as baby boy ? Haven’t been one for many a year and its certainly not a pet name of mine so I can only worry as to why you use such a phrase.

Yes you were talking about selling players because that suited your narrative. It’s just a shame that you can’t grasp the inconsistency of your point that it doesn’t count when Chelsea sell a player to Strasbourg but it doesn’t when Strasbourg sell a player to Chelsea.

Keeping any player that wants to leave, as Casadei did, will only lead to problems. He wanted to go back to Italy so the options no doubt would have been limited. Irrespective the deal in accounting terms did lead to a profit add the fact that negotiating a significant % sell on was almost certainty the best offer that at that point in time was out there. I guess you would have got a better deal so pray tell me how you would have achieved that ?

Near enough all your posts are doom and gloom. I just don’t understand if things are that bad why support the club?

The current owners are there for the long term. They took over an almost impossible situation. A club that was only days away from extinction . A club where player after player were being paid way over the odds.A team that was in dire need of a rebuild. A club that off field was total chaos yet some and I guess your in that number and ironically in need of doing the exact thing you suggest and that is to wake up and smell the coffee.

Thank you, I'm glad i'm shining a light on the glaring issues.

Why do you worry?

So me having an asterisk next to Moreira's sale because he was a failed transfer to Chelsea and Lyon so covered it up with the sister club is an issue but you trying to paint Auba and KK as something other than a colossal failure is okay...

'accounting terms'. We're football fans, not nerds. I'm not a SD so what a stupid argument. I guarantee Marina would have got a better deal though.

Why support a club? Is this Evissy's burner? Go and read my responses to him and there's a pretty good description of what supporting a club means. The fact you think you can just stop supporting a club says a lot more about you. Supporting Chelsea might be a hobby for you pair, but for actual fans of the club its a lifestyle ingrained into our DNA.

The club was illegally ripped from an owner that cared about the club and Clownlake snatched it up on the cheap to make profit. This has been their intent from day one, with the owners striving to be like Brighton of all teams. The owners can be here forever, that doesn't mean fans should stick their noses up their arses and pretend everything they are doing is good. News flash, very little they are doing is good. Be naive and believe all of the PR leaks, no actual fan can be happy with how we do business. Debt free to a billion pound black hole in a couple of years but at least we can lie and pretend we're making book value profit. Guess the hotels were sold just for the fun of it. Oh, and the womens team..

9 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

I'm pretty sure Aubameyang left on a free.

And whatever the "book value" was, we bought Koulibaly for 41.9m and sold him for 23.0m (as per Transfermarkt) so that's 18.9m of real money that's gone ... not 7.5m of accountancy games.

Apologies your right he went on a free

As for playing accountancy games that’s the reality of how transfer fees work and incredibly important when determining actual squad costs .Its how those money men have to ensue compliance not just in the coming year but throughout the 3 year rolling cycles

Their focus when it comes to an underperforming player, which was what Koulibaly and PEA clearly were would be in mitigating the damages caused following those transfer mistakes

. If I were to get into the numbers re year on year costings then that would show why taking a loss in terms of return of fee is just one part of the equation . Of course it’s a I portent part but to gain true perspective you have to factor in other numbers that were in saved not just in year two but three and four in terms of Koulibaly and year two in respect of PEA.

Of course prior to the introduction of FFP and then PSR no one gave a toss about amortisation, impairment or even the accounting bottom line but in this era of increased and stricter financial governance it would be folly to simply rundown a underperforming players contract . It’s far better to take a loss immediately as opposed to having to account for both amortisation and continuing wage, NIC and pension liability going forward.

Just now, terraloon said:

Apologies your right he went on a free

As for playing accountancy games that’s the reality of how player costs work and incredibly important when determining actual squad costs .Its how those money men have to ensue compliance not just in the coming year but throughout the 3 year rolling cycles

Their focus when it comes to an underperforming player, which was what Koulibaly and PEA clearly were would be in mitigating the damages caused following those transfer mistakes

. If I were to get into the numbers re year on year costings then that would show why taking a loss in terms of return of fee is just one part of the equation . Of course it’s a I portent part but to gain true perspective you have to factor in other numbers that were in saved not just in year two but three and four in terms of Koulibaly and year two in respect of PEA.

Of course prior to the introduction of FFP and then PSR no one gave a toss about amortisation, impairment or even the accounting bottom line but in this era of increased and stricter financial governance it would be folly to simply rundown a underperforming players contract . It’s far better to take a loss immediately as opposed to having to account for both amortisation and continuing wage, NIC and pension liability going forward.

Edited June 13, 20251 yr by terraloon

I'm not the biggest fan of the SDs, but you can't be mad that we overspend and then be mad when we walk away from deals where teams are trying to rip us off.

1 hour ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Thank you, I'm glad i'm shining a light on the glaring issues.

Why do you worry?

So me having an asterisk next to Moreira's sale because he was a failed transfer to Chelsea and Lyon so covered it up with the sister club is an issue but you trying to paint Auba and KK as something other than a colossal failure is okay...

'accounting terms'. We're football fans, not nerds. I'm not a SD so what a stupid argument. I guarantee Marina would have got a better deal though.

Why support a club? Is this Evissy's burner? Go and read my responses to him and there's a pretty good description of what supporting a club means. The fact you think you can just stop supporting a club says a lot more about you. Supporting Chelsea might be a hobby for you pair, but for actual fans of the club its a lifestyle ingrained into our DNA.

The club was illegally ripped from an owner that cared about the club and Clownlake snatched it up on the cheap to make profit. This has been their intent from day one, with the owners striving to be like Brighton of all teams. The owners can be here forever, that doesn't mean fans should stick their noses up their arses and pretend everything they are doing is good. News flash, very little they are doing is good. Be naive and believe all of the PR leaks, no actual fan can be happy with how we do business. Debt free to a billion pound black hole in a couple of years but at least we can lie and pretend we're making book value profit. Guess the hotels were sold just for the fun of it. Oh, and the womens team..

“Shining alight on glaring issues” you say it couldn’t be further from realty your focus is to try and put a negative spin on everything that the BlueCo and everything that the directors do. You have to look no further than the title of this thread. You have grasped with both hands the chance to stir up the negativity.

Do you actually know any of the directors? I do .The person in question isn’t diabolical he is an incredibly intelligent and generous person. One thing he ain’t is diabolical.

Where on earth do I suggest that PEA and Koulibaly were anything other than terrible transfer mistakes? Yet again you are making things up to suit your agenda.

Would Marina have done a better deal? These two players had little attraction so you may of course been right but just as likely you may be wrong. Of course she did some fabulous deals when it came to players that were in demand but likewise many of our underperforming players in the RA era were just parked out on loan and their contracts were allowed to run down or sold on at great loss. Look no further back than say Werner or Drinkwater .

Yep I was probably wrong to suggest you move on club wise but sorry I see some real improvements and clear evidence that the owners methods are working. You clearly can’t so we are going to have to agree to disagree but for me until people can accept that Clearlake like the vast majority of PL owners aren’t in for love they are ultimately in it for a profit then supporters wanting the past to return, which it won’t, the those same supporters will just continue to beat themselves up

Sadly the wealth that the PL generates will present these very rich individuals or entities opportunities to take money out of football be it through dividends or appreciation of asset value .Their aim which some don’t get is to generate success on the pitch because that’s the vehicle to generate more income etc

Love or in your case hate the reality of 2025 Chelsea you are going to have to get used to the owners methods they call the shots and whilst you don’t think so they are extremely clever and in turn have very clever people working for them behind the scenes for without them doing just that the club will never move forward.

Edited June 13, 20251 yr by terraloon

Just now, timetowaste said:

I'm not the biggest fan of the SDs, but you can't be mad that we overspend and then be mad when we walk away from deals where teams are trying to rip us off.

Yes you can. It's overspending in average players that drives people mad. For example, I'm not mad that we overspent on Caicedo, but I think that they threw the money away with Enzo. The fact that these owners and SDs are scouting and overspending on loads of average kids instead of paying good (or overspending) money for players that will improve the starting lineup, annoys me. It's a sh*t way of running a FOOTBALL club. And it's not only down to the SDs, it's the strategy of the owners.

2 minutes ago, RMH said:

Yes you can. It's overspending in average players that drives people mad. For example, I'm not mad that we overspent on Caicedo, but I think that they threw the money away with Enzo. The fact that these owners and SDs are scouting and overspending on loads of average kids instead of paying good (or overspending) money for players that will improve the starting lineup, annoys me. It's a sh*t way of running a FOOTBALL club. And it's not only down to the SDs, it's the strategy of the owners.

They don’t see it as throwing money away on youngsters they, the owners, are gambling that these type of players will turnout to be first team players or in total will generate transfer income far in excess of what is being paid out

After a couple of games I thought that not just had we overpaid for Caicedo but we have been well and truly mugged . Now he looks a bargain. I do however agree that Enzo isn’t yet proving his worth. Time will tell on that one.

Ironically they , BlueCo did start by overpaying and bringing in players who many thought would improve the squad players like Koulibaly,PEA and Sterling . We massively overpaid on them they, BlueCo alongside many though these three players would be an improvement. That went well didn’t it !

4 minutes ago, terraloon said:

They don’t see it as throwing money away on youngsters they, the owners, are gambling that these type of players will turnout to be first team players or in total will generate transfer income far in excess of what is being paid out

After a couple of games I thought that not just had we overpaid for Caicedo but we have been well and truly mugged . Now he looks a bargain. I do however agree that Enzo isn’t yet proving his worth. Time will tell on that one.

Ironically they , BlueCo did start by overpaying and bringing in players who many thought would improve the squad players like Koulibaly,PEA and Sterling . We massively overpaid on them they, BlueCo alongside many though these three players would be an improvement. That went well didn’t it !

They have shown from day 1 that they have not a clue about how to run a football club, no matter how you spin it. I can understand the first season, they are new and trying to learn the ropes of European football. But they did not come acknowledging it, they came with that attitude of "we do things better and we'll teach you how to run a football..."

No matter how many times you write the board's propaganda, the truth is that we are buying an insane number of players with "potential", which they try to shift within months (e.g. Felix or Veiga) failing at making much profit. In the meantime, they need to sell lads from the Academy that are not worse than the dross they "identify" to cover their arses with PSR/FFP, as well as Chelsea's hotels and Women's team. They're stripping the Club's assets and have a clear problem with identifying and spending on players required to improve the first men's team. We need a striker in January and these morons go and buy Amougou, a young midfielder who is unlikely to play any more than the 20 minutes given in the ECL. Not only they are incompetent, they are ruining the sporting lives of many youngsters by buying them and not having them play any football for months.

As long as we aren't breaking the PSR and having decent cash in flows, these guys' jobs are as safe as a double brick house. It's just the way the BlueCo wants to operate, these guys are foot soldiers. I'm long over debating the right & wrong of this approach, it's just how they roll. Unless there's a ownership change in future, not much will change.

4 hours ago, timetowaste said:

I'm not the biggest fan of the SDs, but you can't be mad that we overspend and then be mad when we walk away from deals where teams are trying to rip us off.

Walking away from Gittens is fine, overpriced.

Walking away from Maignan if we are going to use Petrovic is fine. (a few million is a drop in the ocean, we spent more on Deivid Washington.

Walking away from Maignan, to then not take Petrovic to the CWC and are looking to sell him, is bat sh*t crazy.

4 hours ago, terraloon said:

“Shining alight on glaring issues” you say it couldn’t be further from realty your focus is to try and put a negative spin on everything that the BlueCo and everything that the directors do. You have to look no further than the title of this thread. You have grasped with both hands the chance to stir up the negativity.

Do you actually know any of the directors? I do .The person in question isn’t diabolical he is an incredibly intelligent and generous person. One thing he ain’t is diabolical.

Where on earth do I suggest that PEA and Koulibaly were anything other than terrible transfer mistakes? Yet again you are making things up to suit your agenda.

Would Marina have done a better deal? These two players had little attraction so you may of course been right but just as likely you may be wrong. Of course she did some fabulous deals when it came to players that were in demand but likewise many of our underperforming players in the RA era were just parked out on loan and their contracts were allowed to run down or sold on at great loss. Look no further back than say Werner or Drinkwater .

Yep I was probably wrong to suggest you move on club wise but sorry I see some real improvements and clear evidence that the owners methods are working. You clearly can’t so we are going to have to agree to disagree but for me until people can accept that Clearlake like the vast majority of PL owners aren’t in for love they are ultimately in it for a profit then supporters wanting the past to return, which it won’t, the those same supporters will just continue to beat themselves up

Sadly the wealth that the PL generates will present these very rich individuals or entities opportunities to take money out of football be it through dividends or appreciation of asset value .Their aim which some don’t get is to generate success on the pitch because that’s the vehicle to generate more income etc

Love or in your case hate the reality of 2025 Chelsea you are going to have to get used to the owners methods they call the shots and whilst you don’t think so they are extremely clever and in turn have very clever people working for them behind the scenes for without them doing just that the club will never move forward.

You do realise i didn't start this thread, right? Or should i not comment on threads other people create?

Which one do you know? Next time you're round for a cuppa tell him to do better. Generous isn't a trait i'd look for to run a football club but i guess it makes sense why we're throwing tens of millions to clubs for kids worth a fraction of that. Charity FC

You made up numbers to spin them as slight losses.

Werner were shocking transfers. They were however bought with the intention of improving the squad, not to flip for a profit.

You've admitted you're a shill for the club because you're mates with a director so i don't really see the point on moving on with this conversation.

1 hour ago, Ukraine Bolt said:

Walking away from Gittens is fine, overpriced.

Walking away from Maignan if we are going to use Petrovic is fine. (a few million is a drop in the ocean, we spent more on Deivid Washington.

Walking away from Maignan, to then not take Petrovic to the CWC and are looking to sell him, is bat sh*t crazy.

Agreed. But we as fans have a tendency to get too hung up on transfer fees, it's the contracts (salaries) which are the most costly. Deivid Washington costs the club A LOT less than Maigan would.