Guess it did mean something in hindsight!
Definitely felt like the writing was on the wall and now he’s confirmed it.
@ZolaWasMagic
Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN
- Thread starter Ali Dia
- Start date
Definitely felt like the writing was on the wall and now he’s confirmed it.
@ZolaWasMagic
I also don’t think you’ll have anywhere near the luxury RA has given you… the whole club structure will change.
Be interested to see how this plays out.
On one hand he is saying that he doesn't want his loans repaid. That is a massive boon for Chelsea FC, as that means they're a debt free club that is essentially self sufficient (as much as a club can be) and are the most (recently successful club) in London with a Premier West London location.
As for the money that is going to go to victims. This is more questionable. If he is genuinly writing off costs, then he there should be a decent amount going to victims, if he is actually wanting his loan covered through the sale, then they're not getting anything.
On one hand he is saying that he doesn't want his loans repaid. That is a massive boon for Chelsea FC, as that means they're a debt free club that is essentially self sufficient (as much as a club can be) and are the most (recently successful club) in London with a Premier West London location.
As for the money that is going to go to victims. This is more questionable. If he is genuinly writing off costs, then he there should be a decent amount going to victims, if he is actually wanting his loan covered through the sale, then they're not getting anything.
Embarrassing Chelsea‘s version of Fergie retiring is the Russian Oilgarch who funded all their success (not that it was ever the same level as United’s) selling up. Shite club.
Hollow, hollow, hollow....
Yeah, that fecker, if he buys Chelsea, is going straight for Mbappe. No doubts about it. Wouldn't be surprised if you start seeing Lebron and some other major sports stars as a minor owners in this thing.
His loans will be repaid as part of the fee. The net will be that difference plus a few other costs sliced off I’m sure. Small price to pay for the PR to avoid sanctions. In the last few days he’s singlehandedly answered the call for peace and is giving 3bn to charity according to his spokesman. Not quite sure I buy it.
Yeah, “net proceeds” is the key phrase.
So Chelsea’s history ends with 6 premier league titles and 2 European cups. They had a good run while it lasted.
This really is clutching straws dude. There’s no doubting anything after Roman is a big backwards step.
He isnt giving them away for free. No loans to be repaid is meaningless.. it'll be included in the sale price.
The bulk of the debt was accumulated pre 2015. Yes he has continued to inject monies but nothing like the level put in previously.
The way in which matters are structured means that the club is already debt free that £1.5 ish billion is on 6he books of the holding company.
What he is doing by donating the sale proceeds to a charity is perhaps as close as you are going to get to him coming out against Putin
Chelsea aren’t self sufficient though
https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation...pacting-results-player-sales-roman-abramovich
Chelsea have never been run for profit under Roman, it’s going to be a huge change
He won’t ask for the loans back.. how much will he sell for though?
If Russia gets back the power over the Ukraine it will not go to the "Ukraine"...
Hardly the era of dominance their fans like the make out with the “most trophies since 2003” stats. Man City are in pole position for their 6th Prem already and they weren’t bought out until 2008.
it will be very different to club operations yes
anyone who thinks otherwise is dreaming
Selling the club may be necessary but the whole 'net proceeds will go to victims of Ukraine war' smacks of PR to avoid sanctions and assets freeze. He won't be demanding £3 billion if money wasn't an issue. Sadly, all too often people fall for this sentiment, which usually is just that...sentiment. In practical terms I'm sure he will walk away (when eventually the money gets channelled out to him) with a tidy profit.
“Net proceeds” and money is to “all victims” so presumably Russian casualties as well.
For sure. But I don’t think this is some hammer blow like giddy oppo fans think. A new ownership group isn‘t coming into a full, years long rebuild like a Newcastle or City when they were first taking over. They aren’t starting from the bottom and building over a decade.
They'll be taking over a winning machine with a world class coach, very good squad, and lots of smart football people in place already.
I don’t foresee a significant drop off at all next season for example. Even if we don’t spend huge there are a whole lot of top free agents available as well as loanees like Connor Gallagher to come back. We’ll be fine.
Just thinking long term, I wonder if Tuchel would be happy to manage Liverpool post Klopp. Say in two years time? Gives Gerrard more time to keep practicing elsewhere, or slip. 
Well over a 20 year period. I’d say now they actually have a history. We were only really successful in the 50s and 60s until the late 80s. They’re a big club now with a very good academy and run relatively self sustainably. They’ll have a plateau while they try and maximise their sponsorship, but look at Liverpool. One great manager and everything changes.
Actually I’m against banning athletes when in Russia’s case is governed by a dictator, is not their choice and I’m sure a lot of Russians are against this invasion.
Chelsea are still massively reliant on Abramovich, especially after covid.
Even if their owners are along the same sort of thing as Liverpools, the days of them just being able to endlessly spend money and never have to worry about breaking even are over.
Even if their owners are along the same sort of thing as Liverpools, the days of them just being able to endlessly spend money and never have to worry about breaking even are over.
If he’s true to his word it’s an amazing gesture
There's nothing legally binding about a PR statement, just like he didn't give the club to the club's charity and he wasn't negotiation peace for Ukraine as was said over the last week. What he's really saying is I'll do something in the future that I probably won't do because no one can actually make me do it in the future once the money's in his hands.
All really just some good PR to try ward off some of the sanctions anger before getting a quick sale in, which judging by some of the replies in this thread is working. (And before people say well give him the benefit of the doubt.. well remember how he made his money in the first place!).
That's a big spanner in the new manager hunt.
I always thought he’d cash his chips out to start an F1 team or buy an existing one at some point, but at no point did the reason he’s doing it now cross my mind.
Please Lord, let some American magnate take them over....
They spent their way to a CL by going mad during a pandemic. It’s not as if they were making clever purchases, they relied on monstrous deals.
You need a well oiled machine ala Liverpool to compete at a lower financial level and even then they have a better financial record behind them than Chelsea.
The revenue just isn’t there for there not to be massive shockwaves throughout how that club is run.
I do wish them all the best but they were hardly competing for the league under a Roman for a good 6 years as it is
The charity didn't want to be seen as acting as a shield against potential sanctions.
That's quite interesting when selling your stake in a business, because the debt/less assets and any intangible (brand) value is usually how the price is determined at arms length (not that much with RA is arms length, mind
). But yeah, if he's writing off his loans before any sale, I assume Chelsea FC would only be liable for any tax gains on those capital loan write offs - a bit of a gain for Chelsea but i assume it's all semantics because he'll still be receiving his "X" billion valuation in his pocket.It's like those "Sale" gimmicks in stores, where they mark up the "market value" by 20%, only to offer a "20%-30%" discount during the sale. Maybe a nice tax saving for him RA for the write off/loss of those loans as well.
You aren’t going to fade in to obscurity no. There’s a good foundation at the club. You will notice huge changes though and I’m quite sure many of the staff will move on, such as Mariana etc.
If the sale drags you could have issues and the stadium problem could create difficulties for a new investor.
You’ve been spoilt with Roman basically gifting you finance. That won’t happen again and you’ll be eating at the same table as everyone else.
Maybe the Glazers can secure a loan and buy them as well.
We haven’t “endlessly spent” in ages. We’ve been a sell before buying club for years now. And that’ll likely continue.
Sell unwanted players for large fees to partly fund transfer targets.
What’s with the thread title?
Chelsea is for sale according to the owner! It’s fact
Chelsea is for sale according to the owner! It’s fact
Never.
I saw a statement from Hansjorg claiming that Chelsea owed Abramovich 2 billion and the club itself had no money, I have also heard a few moments ago that Abramovich will waver that debt but where Chelsea will now find their money to operate at their current level and certainly the amount Abramovich has put in to it will be interesting and I wonder how this will impact on the squad and general running of it.
It depends on the new owner. Todd is all about splashy big name players. If he is part of the equation, it could be bigger signings than the Roman era.
The fact that RA is wiping your debt suggests that’s not entirely true