Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN

UweBein

Creator of the Worst Analogy on the Internet.
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
3,729
Location
Köln
Supports
Chelsea

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,568
Location
Manchester
The government should auction off Chelsea prior to next season. All proceeds from the sale plus the 1.5 billion in the trust fund should be used for the victims of the war. This way justice is seen to be done and Chelsea and its new owners can begin a new chapter with a clean slate.
I know just the man to get involved here;

 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
52,836
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
You're fundamentally misunderstanding why Roman has been sanctioned. It isn't to do with geopolitical or business morals. It's because he's connected to a regime that is currently invading a democratic European country. Russia is posing a serious threat to western stability so in return the west is using the levers of power available to it as a counter attack.

If you want to argue that legally the sanctions will be unenforceable ultimately it isn't really about that either. It's about putting pressure on Putin and the Russian regime. If rich and powerful Russians like Abramovich start to feel their lives becoming uncomfortable, their wealth and status becoming threatened then this may grow opposition to Putin among those that may be able to influence his deposing. There's also evidence that Abramovich is directly involved in the supply of materials, namely steel, for this invasion and lots of speculation about his deep integration into Putin's regime.

Lets not forget that Abramovich lost his right to live in the UK in 2018 after Russia used a chemical weapon on British soil that killed British citizens. These are not triffling matters in terms of our own security.

In theory the likes of the UAE (City) and Saudi Arabia (Newcastle) could suffer the same fate. It wouldn't be contingent on any moral test, however. It would be contingent on them making geopolitical maneuvers that seriously draw the ire of western nations like the US and UK. You never know what can happen but that doesn't seem all that likely considering how they've been positioning themselves in the current world order.
Its all double standards. If these people really gave a shit about what they sprllew the likes of American owners up and down the league would have ended up with sanctions after the shit their governments pulled in IRAQ with the myth of WMDS. This is all a game of scoring cheap geo political points. Nothing to do with morals let alone humanitarian care
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
23,038
Location
Somewhere out there
Its all double standards. If these people really gave a shit about what they sprllew the likes of American owners up and down the league would have ended up with sanctions after the shit their governments pulled in IRAQ with the myth of WMDS. This is all a game of scoring cheap geo political points. Nothing to do with morals let alone humanitarian care
The UK were in Iraq with the US

Are they gonna sanction all business owners for their own decisions? :lol:

Not sure you thought this one through Chief.
 
Last edited:

The Boy

Full Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
4,456
Supports
Brighton and Hove Albion
Sports washing works until it doesn't anymore, that should worry a few of them.
This is why Amanda Staveley spoke out in favour of Abramovich, this could easily happen to Newcastle and it probably should and I imagine this scares them quite a lot. I've said it a few times in this thread, I feel very sorry for Chelsea fans, none of us have a say in who owns our clubs, but if this stops dirty money being invested in the UK and the EPL then I am all for it.
 

UweBein

Creator of the Worst Analogy on the Internet.
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
3,729
Location
Köln
Supports
Chelsea
That’s just more whataboutism. Chelsea are where they are today, 2 CL and a 5 leagues because they made a deal with the devil.
It's not - I am arguing that so much capital moved from Russia to Europe.
We are all in this. Chelsea is not worse or better than other investments, funded by Russian money.

Also it is fair to question why a prime minister is elevating one oligarch to the house of lords while the other one is being sanctioned?
(At some point decisions like these need to be comparable on the same scale.)

Putin cares about nothing but himself, that aint the point of these sanctions which are designed to put enormous pressure on the richest of the rich in Russia, which in turn puts huge pressure on Putin and his government.
We will see, I guess-
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,593
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
Why do you feel sorry for him? The past 15 or so years have been a wet dream for any Chelsea fan and they are a bonafide super club now, sanctions or not, they will be in a miles better position than they were with fexking Ken Bates.
He has and he even went to Moscow in 2008:smirk:
I feel bad for him as a mate, rather than as a Chelsea fan per se, because football is a much bigger part of his life than it is mine.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,593
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
My best friend is a Chelsea fan, I used to be a regular with him in the shed end years ago when we both lived near London.
I don't feel sorry for him at all. They won the lottery, brought their way into winning with a dodgy as hell owner who pumped in nearly £2b, and became arrogant.

The fans were chanting his name during a minutes respect for Ukraine, majority of the fans deserve this in my opinion.

You dance with the devil, you'll eventually get burnt.
Yeah I completely understand that feeling, but still, my mate is quite a sensitive soul.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
23,038
Location
Somewhere out there
He has and he even went to Moscow in 2008:smirk:
I feel bad for him as a mate, rather than as a Chelsea fan per se, because football is a much bigger part of his life than it is mine.
I still don’t get why? He still has Chelsea, it aint going anywhere?
Do you feel sorry that his football team might suddenly be run a little differently? I don’t get what’s to feel sorry about. Does he feel sorry for you that United no longer win the league most seasons?
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,593
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
I still don’t get why? He still has Chelsea, it aint going anywhere?
Do you feel sorry that his football team might suddenly be run a little differently? I don’t get what’s to feel sorry about. Does he feel sorry for you that United no longer win the league most seasons?
I guess you're not big on empathy.
 

villain

Hates Beyoncé
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
14,974
He's got a great username too.

The government should auction off Chelsea prior to next season. All proceeds from the sale plus the 1.5 billion in the trust fund should be used for the victims of the war. This way justice is seen to be done and Chelsea and its new owners can begin a new chapter with a clean slate.
As good of an idea this sounds in isolation, luckily we have laws in place to prevent the Government from seizing & selling off someone's possessions on a whim and without a fair trial put in place. Otherwise all of us would be at risk at any time and there would be nothing to stop it.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
23,038
Location
Somewhere out there
I guess you're not big on empathy.
eh?

It’s a football club, that will continue to be a huge football club.

What am I empathising over?

Do you empathise every time they get a bad result or don’t manage to get the player they wanted in the transfer market?

We’ve had a much worse ownership situation, where the club itself was leveraged, Chelsea won’t have anything remotely like that. No football fans feel sorry for us, we still have our club, we still spend money, and just like Chelsea we still have it better than 99% of all other clubs in the football pyramid, we’re just a bit shit.
 

The Boy

Full Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
4,456
Supports
Brighton and Hove Albion
As good of an idea this sounds in isolation, luckily we have laws in place to prevent the Government from seizing & selling off someone's possessions on a whim and without a fair trial put in place. Otherwise all of us would be at risk at any time and there would be nothing to stop it.
They just need a court to say the money used to buy Chelsea was derived from the proceeds of crime. Which could a bit more difficult than it sounds, but worth a go.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
52,836
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
The UK were in Iraq with the US

Are they gonna sanction all business owners for their own decisions? :lol:
Talk of missing the point. We didn't see a single western rich businness tycoon who aided the rogue activities of USA and UK in IRAQ sanctioned for the self same damage and suffering that Ukrainians are going through right now thanks to rogue geo politic actions. If you can't see why that is hypocrisy 101. I don't see what more anyone can say to you.
 

Manncunian

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
1,071
Location
Manchester
It does feel quite pathetic and embarrassing doesn’t it? Some of the excuses and whataboutism being regurgitated by our Chelsea bunch. I do almost feel sorry for them you know.
It’s more than pathetic. It’s disgusting and abhorrent.

Look at the atrocities over in Ukraine, and people here are whinging about how they’re having to suffer because their football club is being sanctioned. They wouldn’t know suffering if it slapped them in the face.

The level to which people put football before everything else is shocking to say the least.

Perspective needed.
 

villain

Hates Beyoncé
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
14,974
They just need a court to say the money used to buy Chelsea was derived from the proceeds of crime. Which could a bit more difficult than it sounds, but worth a go.
Well yes, that's the point - the court would have to find RA guilty, only after a fair trial where both sides provide evidence. It can't (and shouldn't) be done just on a whim.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
23,038
Location
Somewhere out there
Talk of missing the point. We didn't see a single western rich businness tycoon who aided the rogue activities of USA and UK in IRAQ sanctioned for the self same damage and suffering that Ukrainians are going through right now thanks to rogue geo politic actions. If you can't see why that is hypocrisy 101. I don't see what more anyone can say to you.
Are you playing daft?

How can a UK government go to war in Iraq, and then sanction business owners for them going to war in Iraq? What the feck are you smoking Chief?

Maybe edit your post and ask why didn’t a French or Italian club sanction an American or UK owner for the war in Iraq.
 

Rooney in Paris

Gerrard shirt..Anfield? You'll Never Live it Down
Scout
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
36,071
Location
In an elephant sanctuary
Popping back into this thread after about 12 hours to see new Chelsea fans popping up with their wonderful whataboutisms and apology of Roman.

This thread is very much the meme "tell me you don't understand sanctions/haven't read the sanctions without telling me you don't understand sanctions/haven't read the sanctions".
Maybe we should have our own Redcafe list of sanctioned Chelsea posters :D
 

Manncunian

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
1,071
Location
Manchester
Its all double standards. If these people really gave a shit about what they sprllew the likes of American owners up and down the league would have ended up with sanctions after the shit their governments pulled in IRAQ with the myth of WMDS. This is all a game of scoring cheap geo political points. Nothing to do with morals let alone humanitarian care
You clearly don’t understand the difference between an oligarch in Russia and a business owner in the west.

American business owners don’t launder their brutal dictator’s money and their wealth is not as a direct result of their links to said dictator.

You’re comparing apples with oranges and your example is nowhere near like for like.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Well yes, that's the point - the court would have to find RA guilty, only after a fair trial where both sides provide evidence. It can't (and shouldn't) be done just on a whim.
They have found evidence though?
 

Mac1997

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 14, 2022
Messages
70
how much money do chelsea have in the bank?

i.e. how long before they go bust
They said yesterday on SkySports that as of their last accounts they only had 16 million cash which isn't enough to even cover one month of wages, their last accounts were some time ago though, I can't remember when they said they were last published.
 

The Boy

Full Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
4,456
Supports
Brighton and Hove Albion
Well yes, that's the point - the court would have to find RA guilty, only after a fair trial where both sides provide evidence. It can't (and shouldn't) be done just on a whim.
It's not that straight forward, since 2017 unexplained wealth orders (UWOs) have been introduced. They basically mean that when they are issued recipients have to explain where the money came from, if they fail to do this assets can be seized. So far they have hardly been used at all but this would be a good time to do it. The downside of them is the high cost if you get it wrong as they are 'loser pays' so if you have wealthy defendent like Abramovich covering his costs could quickly mount up.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Have they proved it in court?
Not sure they have to or if that is how it works?
He literally bought shares in a steel company, 8 days before the invasion, that manufactures weapons and tanks for Russia military?
That’s down on record.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
23,038
Location
Somewhere out there
Some Chelsea fan suggested to UK should be regressed to the 1500's due to war crimes committed through history...
There’s an argument for sure that some Western countries could/should have sanctioned the UK and US for the war in Iraq, but suggesting the UK itself should’ve sanctioned American owners was a bit extra special. :lol:
 

crossy1686

career ending
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
32,146
Location
Manchester/Stockholm
There’s an argument for sure that some Western countries could/should have sanctioned the UK and US for the war in Iraq, but suggesting the UK itself should’ve sanctioned American owners was a bit extra special. :lol:
And if the UK wasn't totally compliant in the war then maybe they should, but they're not exactly going to sanction themselves for a war they thought was valid at the time.

Even if American owners got sanctioned, it wouldn't affect us all that much except the Glazers would probably lose the club and they couldn't take money out anymore. They'd actually be doing us a favour.
 

villain

Hates Beyoncé
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
14,974
It's not that straight forward, since 2017 unexplained wealth orders (UWOs) have been introduced. They basically mean that when they are issued recipients have to explain where the money came from, if they fail to do this assets can be seized. So far they have hardly been used at all but this would be a good time to do it. The downside of them is the high cost if you get it wrong as they are 'loser pays' so if you have wealthy defendent like Abramovich covering his costs could quickly mount up.
His assets have been frozen, and they can't be sold off without him agreeing to it & getting nothing in return, or him being found guilty in court at which point they will be sold off. That's where we are now.
The original proposal was for the Government to be able to seize & sell off assets without someone getting a chance to defend themselves or agree to it in the first place. That's a dangerous precedent which doesn't belong in a democratic country, because it can very quickly lead to corruption.

Not sure they have to or if that is how it works?
He literally bought shares in a steel company, 8 days before the invasion, that manufactures weapons and tanks for Russia military?
That’s down on record.
Of course it's how it works, why would they not have to prove it in court?
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
His assets have been frozen, and they can't be sold off without him agreeing to it & getting nothing in return, or him being found guilty in court at which point they will be sold off. That's where we are now.
The original proposal was for the Government to be able to seize & sell off assets without someone getting a chance to defend themselves or agree to it in the first place. That's a dangerous precedent which doesn't belong in a democratic country, because it can very quickly lead to corruption.



Of course it's how it works, why would they not have to prove it in court?
Before they seize assets? The fact they’ve already done it?
let’s say you’re carrying a huge sum of money and the police stop you. They’re allowed to take that money from you until you can prove it’s yours and and obtained legally.
The law is pretty consistent at all levels with this? That’s what seizing is. Roman is allowed to fight this, nobody has said he isn’t.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,593
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
eh?

It’s a football club, that will continue to be a huge football club.

What am I empathising over?

Do you empathise every time they get a bad result or don’t manage to get the player they wanted in the transfer market?

We’ve had a much worse ownership situation, where the club itself was leveraged, Chelsea won’t have anything remotely like that. No football fans feel sorry for us, we still have our club, we still spend money, and just like Chelsea we still have it better than 99% of all other clubs in the football pyramid, we’re just a bit shit.
I think you're getting a bit carried away here. Was thinking I might drop him a text cos I haven't spoken to him since I left London. I'm not lighting candles or having a whip-round.
 

MayosNoun

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2020
Messages
3,576
Supports
Chelsea
In the grand scheme of things we will be fine. However football is secondary right now and the government are entitled to apply sanctions however they feel necessary.

Roman Abramovich has been amazing for Chelsea. It’s hard to predict where it will go from here as it’s only a guessing game however I’d imagine the club, played and fans will have an answer before the 31st May. It surely won’t carry on that long.

The war in Ukraine must take priority and rightly so. Moaning about football seems foolish right now but I suppose it’s a good distraction from the crisis in Ukraine.

I stand by what Roman Abramovich has done for Chelsea. He has developed the club to another level and the academy is absolutely incredible. However we must move on now and it’s best not having any negative associations regardless of evidence. We could easily flourish as a club with developing young talent and older heads like Thiago Silva and hopefully never wasting money on players like Lukaku again.

It’s fair to be thankful but accept moving on.
 

villain

Hates Beyoncé
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
14,974
Before they seize assets? The fact they’ve already done it?
let’s say you’re carrying a huge sum of money and the police stop you. They’re allowed to take that money from you until you can prove it’s yours and and obtained legally.
The law is pretty consistent at all levels with this? That’s what seizing is. Roman is allowed to fight this, nobody has said he isn’t.
In the context of the law, his assets have been frozen until proof of criminality can be found in court - or he forfeits them.
The original suggestion was for the Government to sell said assets without the accused agreeing to the sale, or being given a chance in court to defend themselves.

How that would work in your example is the police are able to take money off you based on an accusation, and you never see that money again.