padr81
Full Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2015
- Messages
- 12,075
- Supports
- Man City
I mean Pat got the joke from the off...Ahhh the old “I’m not owned, it was a joke!” routine.
I mean Pat got the joke from the off...Ahhh the old “I’m not owned, it was a joke!” routine.
Pat Nevin?I don't mind it but it would be a wee bit disrespectful to the player I'm paying homage to
Someone who wants to get a a couple of billion dollars cash out of the UK quick sharp.Who forgives 1.5 billion debt? Doesn't make any sense.
Did you just try to make an unfavourable comparison between Abramovich and Kissinger? Read up on history. Friendly advice despite your foul language. You are putting your massive ignoricance on display.so he’s now Henry Kissinger and Bill Gates ? Feck off, he’s crook, pure and simple
He is not. He bought the club for 140m and is demanding more than 2.5B if reports are correct. He's getting back every penny.Who forgives 1.5 billion debt? Doesn't make any sense.
we'll likely be sold for slightly above that, so he would take it out of that.Who forgives 1.5 billion debt? Doesn't make any sense.
Forgive my ignorance but isn’t there a difference between selling an asset for what it is now deemed to be worth and the debt owed to him being repaid? Happy to be correctedwe'll likely be sold for slightly above that, so he would take it out of that.
His wording is not "I am clearing all debts owed" it's "all debts will not have to be repaid" slight difference.....
If Chelsea is worth 3bn but has a debt of 1,5bn, then any potential buyer would only pay 1,5bn cash to take over the club.Forgive my ignorance but isn’t there a difference between selling an asset for what it is now deemed to be worth and the debt owed to him being repaid? Happy to be corrected
Hahahaha mate, you expect me to be all "I hope they get good owners and continue to flourish....."Wow so childish
Yeah the one and only.Pat Nevin?
Personally I wouldn't wish losing their club on any set of fans (not to mention the livelihoods that will tank as a consequence) but maybe I'm in the minority.Hahahaha mate, you expect me to be all "I hope they get good owners and continue to flourish....."
Why would you lose your club? It just wouldn't be in the prem anymore.Personally I wouldn't wish losing their club on any set of fans (not to mention the livelihoods that will tank as a consequence) but maybe I'm in the minority.
Why would you lose your club? It just wouldn't be in the prem anymore.
That's the crux of it.
I mean ideally, I'd like the owners like the Oystons and the club does a Bury and goes under.
so its speculation. it kinda sets a precedent though possibly. we could in effect go for every rich person from a country if the country does some fecked up shit. Richard Branson gonna be on the chopping boardThese are money men, this is devastating them financially. Maybe they know people who could do the world a favour..
He never transferred the club to the charity he planned to transfer the stewardship.Sorry but can someone do the maths for dummies, he bought club, transferred it to a charity and said he wouldn't draw down on loan of a couple billion, it wasn't right what he done but how are Chelsea worse off in my very less knowckledge of this, Chelsea are better off, a loan wiped off, and what they have,
Strangely enough I don't think Uniteds issue is to do with owners not investing. You still have one of the most expensive squads, pretty much comparable to ours., If you take both ins and outs into consideration, Uniteds is considerably higher. Uniteds issue is the club structure and management, which in my humble opinion is better at ChelseaI'm not so sure about this. Don't get me wrong, the Dodgers are a model organization in terms of how they are run and putting a competitive team on the field. But its not obvious (pandemic effects aside) that they are going into their own pocket very far. They have huge revenues due to selling out a big stadium in a very wealthy part of the country and, even more importantly, a massively lucrative local TV deal (there is a national TV deal that clubs share but the real money is in local market deals and that's where teams like the Dodgers and Yankees get most of their revenue advantage).
In sum, the Dodgers are actually a lot like Manchester United under the Glazers, just much better run. They are outspending their competitors not because the owners are going into their pockets but because of a revenue advantage they have built on their own.
The Man City deal saw agreed in one dayThe big risk for Chelsea here is that any takeover happens through a leveraged buyout, similar to United. Abramovich is looking to offload quickly and these types of deals just don't happen in a week or two. The stadium situation has to be a concern too. There is no quick or cheap solution to that and I would suspect that a sale price north of $1.5bn is unlikely.
Yes but with finances that Chelsea have now, it shouldn’t be a problem. Its never been a problem for United unless you live on twitter or Reddit.The big risk for Chelsea here is that any takeover happens through a leveraged buyout, similar to United. Abramovich is looking to offload quickly and these types of deals just don't happen in a week or two. The stadium situation has to be a concern too. There is no quick or cheap solution to that and I would suspect that a sale price north of $1.5bn is unlikely.
Look. If this is your sense of humor, you may need to calm down.Why would you lose your club? It just wouldn't be in the prem anymore.
That's the crux of it.
Absent the debt 1.5 bn is very likely. And Roman suggested the debt is a write off. And even after reading his statement without my blue tinted glasses that is what I got from his statement.The big risk for Chelsea here is that any takeover happens through a leveraged buyout, similar to United. Abramovich is looking to offload quickly and these types of deals just don't happen in a week or two. The stadium situation has to be a concern too. There is no quick or cheap solution to that and I would suspect that a sale price north of $1.5bn is unlikely.
Difference is that United was an obvious opportunity to take over a massive revenue generating scheme. One look at the books will tell any prospective buyers, especially American buyers, that Chelsea would not function well as a piggy bank. You need historic clubs with massive followings who will fork over cash regardless of what you do to attract the likes of the Glazers and Kroenke. We are more likely to get frugal, but solid management like the Fenway group, or another non American (hopefully British) sugar daddy that wants in the game.The big risk for Chelsea here is that any takeover happens through a leveraged buyout, similar to United. Abramovich is looking to offload quickly and these types of deals just don't happen in a week or two. The stadium situation has to be a concern too. There is no quick or cheap solution to that and I would suspect that a sale price north of $1.5bn is unlikely.
For some reason the UK government are dithering on sanctions, so he's trying to sell it and his properties in the UK quick before the sanctions happen. That way he can get his money out and hide it.Really need some help here….
- He is only selling as he fears losing it through sanctions
- If sanctions are incoming, how is it even possible for someone to give him a couple of billion quid for the club?
Aside from that conundrum, imagine how bad the new owner will be. Happy to give a Russian Oligarch under sanctions, lots of cash.
Absolute horror show of a situation. Great to see.
The first point is a givenReally need some help here….
- He is only selling as he fears losing it through sanctions
- If sanctions are incoming, how is it even possible for someone to give him a couple of billion quid for the club?
Aside from that conundrum, imagine how bad the new owner will be. Happy to give a Russian Oligarch under sanctions, lots of cash.
Absolute horror show of a situation. Great to see.
Put to one side what is happening and l ets look at some hard numbers.Difference is that United was an obvious opportunity to take over a massive revenue generating scheme. One look at the books will tell any prospective buyers, especially American buyers, that Chelsea would not function well as a piggy bank. You need historic clubs with massive followings who will fork over cash regardless of what you do to attract the likes of the Glazers and Kroenke. We are more likely to get frugal, but solid management like the Fenway group, or another non American (hopefully British) sugar daddy that wants in the game.
Seems It would take something for the whole world to be up in arms over, like Putin going full on maniac. It also allows them to plan for a situation like this to cover their backs i guessWonder if we'll ever see similar situations at Man City and Newcastle, with their equally dodgy ownership.
Thanks for this. Great post.The amount of wishful thinking and denial of Abramovich’s long and extensive links to the post glasnost Russian kleptocracy and the entire tenure of Putin by sportswashed Chelsea fans on here is nothing short of hilarious.
This is Alexei Navalny’s list of 35 Russian oligarchs who were instrumental in the running and propping up of Putin’s state, and the poisoning and imprisonment of navalny. Guess who is number 1 on this list?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navalny_35
This is his ally Vladimir Ashurkov’s further pruned list of the 8 biggest criminals in that galley of 35. Again, a prominent name makes number 1 on the list -
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021...remlin-critics-top-8-sanctions-targets-a72647
These two lists by Putin‘s jailed main opposition leader are the template for the oligarchs Biden is currently being asked by bipartisan groups in Congress to target for sanctions -
https://nypost.com/2022/02/25/house-group-demands-sanctions-on-russias-navalny-35/
Same applies in this country. Boris Johnson’s template for who to go for next? Yep, it’s navalny’s list -
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...o-widen-sanctions-on-more-oligarchs-in-london
Fair point. Kissinger's team, Greuther Furth, is bottom of the Bundesliga, whereas Abramovich's team, Chelsea, is near the top of the Premier League.Did you just try to make an unfavourable comparison between Abramovich and Kissinger? Read up on history. Friendly advice despite your foul language. You are putting your massive ignoricance on display.
The issue is the timing of this. Roman needs a quick sale, and that vastly increases the likelihood that any buyer would use credit to buy the club, and thus some or all of the repayment of that credit could be put on the club rather than any individuals. The list of people willing and able to spend billions on a football club is much smaller than a lot of people think, and it bears repeating that the stadium is going to be a real issue for any buyers. It's no longer fit for purpose for a club the size of Chelsea and there is no easy or cheap solution to that.Difference is that United was an obvious opportunity to take over a massive revenue generating scheme. One look at the books will tell any prospective buyers, especially American buyers, that Chelsea would not function well as a piggy bank. You need historic clubs with massive followings who will fork over cash regardless of what you do to attract the likes of the Glazers and Kroenke. We are more likely to get frugal, but solid management like the Fenway group, or another non American (hopefully British) sugar daddy that wants in the game.
There's a book you might like called 'Once Upon a Time in Russia', talks about the theft of Russia's assets at natural resources by the ruling class and oligarchs during 'perestroika'.The amount of wishful thinking and denial of Abramovich’s long and extensive links to the post glasnost Russian kleptocracy and the entire tenure of Putin by sportswashed Chelsea fans on here is nothing short of hilarious.
This is Alexei Navalny’s list of 35 Russian oligarchs who were instrumental in the running and propping up of Putin’s state, and the poisoning and imprisonment of navalny. Guess who is number 1 on this list?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navalny_35
This is his ally Vladimir Ashurkov’s further pruned list of the 8 biggest criminals in that galley of 35. Again, a prominent name makes number 1 on the list -
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021...remlin-critics-top-8-sanctions-targets-a72647
These two lists by Putin‘s jailed main opposition leader are the template for the oligarchs Biden is currently being asked by bipartisan groups in Congress to target for sanctions -
https://nypost.com/2022/02/25/house-group-demands-sanctions-on-russias-navalny-35/
Same applies in this country. Boris Johnson’s template for who to go for next? Yep, it’s navalny’s list -
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...o-widen-sanctions-on-more-oligarchs-in-london
This. Chelsea are in a situation where this goes one of two ways.The big risk for Chelsea here is that any takeover happens through a leveraged buyout, similar to United. Abramovich is looking to offload quickly and these types of deals just don't happen in a week or two. The stadium situation has to be a concern too. There is no quick or cheap solution to that and I would suspect that a sale price north of $1.5bn is unlikely.
The world is not black and white my friend. You can condemn Russia for obvious war crimes and at the same time say it is not right to send people to the gulag based on weak or unsubstantiated claims.The whole world - 'Fk Putin and Russia. Our hearts bleed for the loss of life in Ukraine'
Chelsea fans - 'Oh what a wonderful guy Ambramovich was. We'll miss you. Much love'
Newcastle and Man City fans ... Stick heads in sand. 'Don't look at us. Don't look at us'.
Its ridiculous.