| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea 15:27 - Mar 3 with 1673 views | hype313 |
|  |
| |  |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:12 - Mar 3 with 1564 views | Illinoisblue |
Let’s hope, just like Man Utd, they’re set for some barren years. |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:14 - Mar 3 with 1559 views | hype313 |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:12 - Mar 3 by Illinoisblue |
Let’s hope, just like Man Utd, they’re set for some barren years. |
They're in a far worse position than Utd, Utd have the whole marketing machine behind them and are a far bigger global brand, add the fact that their matchday revenues dwarf Chelsea's, it puts Chelsea future in serious doubt. | |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:18 - Mar 3 with 1540 views | tonybied |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:14 - Mar 3 by hype313 |
They're in a far worse position than Utd, Utd have the whole marketing machine behind them and are a far bigger global brand, add the fact that their matchday revenues dwarf Chelsea's, it puts Chelsea future in serious doubt. |
A club like Chelsea imploding is exactly what football needs to make people sit up and realise football is broken. |  | | |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:19 - Mar 3 with 1540 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
I have no idea who the author is but his argument seems to rely on ignoring the 2021 performance and looking at the 5 years prior, which are collectively massively skewed by one year (2019 with £87m shortfall). You could just as easily choose to exclude that year and suddenly it would be +£40m to play with per year |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:21 - Mar 3 with 1528 views | hype313 |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:18 - Mar 3 by tonybied |
A club like Chelsea imploding is exactly what football needs to make people sit up and realise football is broken. |
"Chelsea’s net operating cash flow was £7.8m. Or £1.6m a season. So if you’re a billionaire looking for a club, knowing Chelsea fans’ appetite for big-ticket signings, would you buy them?"
They will go back to being a mid table non entity. Just too much money to spend for very little gain, fine under Abramovich, but other investors will want more back than just a Visa and washing cash. | |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:26 - Mar 3 with 1497 views | SWGF |
SWGF Fact
Went to school with Matt. Was in my class at Colchester Grammar. |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:52 - Mar 3 with 1423 views | PhilTWTD |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:26 - Mar 3 by SWGF |
SWGF Fact
Went to school with Matt. Was in my class at Colchester Grammar. |
Phil Fact
Matt rang me up one day for a chat about short-lived Town director Michael Anderson. |  | | |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 17:00 - Mar 3 with 1401 views | gordon |
Basically what I'm taking from this is that it's similar to buying ITFC from Marcus Evans after he bankrolled us to trophy after trophy for those glorious 13 years. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 17:34 - Mar 3 with 1342 views | Keno |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:14 - Mar 3 by hype313 |
They're in a far worse position than Utd, Utd have the whole marketing machine behind them and are a far bigger global brand, add the fact that their matchday revenues dwarf Chelsea's, it puts Chelsea future in serious doubt. |
Im sure we all have our fingers crossed for them |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 18:19 - Mar 3 with 1275 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 17:00 - Mar 3 by gordon |
Basically what I'm taking from this is that it's similar to buying ITFC from Marcus Evans after he bankrolled us to trophy after trophy for those glorious 13 years. |
With the sums involved, it looks like it's it can only be funded by:
1. A stupidly wealthy billionaire
2. Phil & Gav's advertising and Audi scam revenue
3. Gullible US firefighters |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 18:57 - Mar 3 with 1185 views | MattinLondon |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:21 - Mar 3 by hype313 |
"Chelsea’s net operating cash flow was £7.8m. Or £1.6m a season. So if you’re a billionaire looking for a club, knowing Chelsea fans’ appetite for big-ticket signings, would you buy them?"
They will go back to being a mid table non entity. Just too much money to spend for very little gain, fine under Abramovich, but other investors will want more back than just a Visa and washing cash. |
The six premier league seasons prior to Abramovich taking control of them they always finished in the top six. Also won the FA Cup snd a European trophy. They were not mid table. [Post edited 3 Mar 2022 18:58]
|  | | |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 12:22 - Mar 4 with 914 views | HighgateBlue |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 16:19 - Mar 3 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
I have no idea who the author is but his argument seems to rely on ignoring the 2021 performance and looking at the 5 years prior, which are collectively massively skewed by one year (2019 with £87m shortfall). You could just as easily choose to exclude that year and suddenly it would be +£40m to play with per year |
Yes absolutely.
I think he could have still made a perfectly sound argument, albeit a less extreme one, if he had included the 2021 performance. Not excluding any year artificially, it would appear that there would be somewhere between £10m and £20m per year generated, on average. But one would have to look into the figures in a lot more detail to see what's really going on. I'm not sure exactly how they account for player values, for example. As pointed out, Lukaku ain't worth £100m any more. Not sure when they start writing down that paper loss in their accounts.
Anyway, all of this is fine if it's to be a plaything for billionaires, or a money washing machine for billionaires. Which it might be. But there is a longer and longer queue of clubs vying for those 4 CL places. West Ham are now getting 59,000 fans through the door, and Newcastle have a much bigger attendance than Chelsea and lots of (equally dubious) new financing. Several of these bloated clubs are going to fail to make the CL every single year, and I fail to see how they can be profitable over a 5 year period without being in the CL for at least 4 of those seasons.
Abramovich should never have been allowed to buy Chelsea. Maybe English football would be slightly less comical (and not in a good way) if he had not been allowed. The idea that he is a fit and proper person is ridiculous, and it should not have taken Putin's insanity to realise that. |  | | |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 12:53 - Mar 4 with 848 views | BlueyandCrazy |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 18:57 - Mar 3 by MattinLondon |
The six premier league seasons prior to Abramovich taking control of them they always finished in the top six. Also won the FA Cup snd a European trophy. They were not mid table. [Post edited 3 Mar 2022 18:58]
|
Yes they’d started to have a little success after years of being a complete non entity.
In the past every club had a few seasons in the Sun as Chelsea did 20 years ago.
But for the Abramovic money, they would have drifted back to norm
Let’s not forget
- tier 2 club for most of the 80s
- underlying support is 4th in London
- club traditionally is London 4th team
- attendances and trophy hall pre 1990 low and sparse
They were a non entity and hopefully will go back to that. |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 13:35 - Mar 4 with 805 views | Radlett_blue |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 12:53 - Mar 4 by BlueyandCrazy |
Yes they’d started to have a little success after years of being a complete non entity.
In the past every club had a few seasons in the Sun as Chelsea did 20 years ago.
But for the Abramovic money, they would have drifted back to norm
Let’s not forget
- tier 2 club for most of the 80s
- underlying support is 4th in London
- club traditionally is London 4th team
- attendances and trophy hall pre 1990 low and sparse
They were a non entity and hopefully will go back to that. |
Yes, Chelsea may drift back to Premier League obscurity without Abramovich's backing, but the reality is that they'll only be replaced by someone equally dislikeable - West Ham or Newcastle, for example? |  |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 13:54 - Mar 4 with 782 views | BlueyandCrazy |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 13:35 - Mar 4 by Radlett_blue |
Yes, Chelsea may drift back to Premier League obscurity without Abramovich's backing, but the reality is that they'll only be replaced by someone equally dislikeable - West Ham or Newcastle, for example? |
Maybe dislikeable from an ownership viewpoint, but at least they are proper traditional football clubs who’s underlying support is huge.
Abramovics money totally distorted Chelsea making them a ‘big club’ supposedly which they never were | |
| |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 14:29 - Mar 4 with 750 views | MattinLondon |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 12:53 - Mar 4 by BlueyandCrazy |
Yes they’d started to have a little success after years of being a complete non entity.
In the past every club had a few seasons in the Sun as Chelsea did 20 years ago.
But for the Abramovic money, they would have drifted back to norm
Let’s not forget
- tier 2 club for most of the 80s
- underlying support is 4th in London
- club traditionally is London 4th team
- attendances and trophy hall pre 1990 low and sparse
They were a non entity and hopefully will go back to that. |
Blimey, if all of that makes a team a non-entity then I wonder what we are. | | | |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 14:36 - Mar 4 with 736 views | Radlett_blue |
| Great thread on the implications of buying Chelsea on 13:54 - Mar 4 by BlueyandCrazy |
Maybe dislikeable from an ownership viewpoint, but at least they are proper traditional football clubs who’s underlying support is huge.
Abramovics money totally distorted Chelsea making them a ‘big club’ supposedly which they never were |
I don't think either West Ham or Newcastle have "huge" support, certainly no bigger than Chelsea's, while neither club has much more of a history of winning trophies pre-Abramovich. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
