Abramovich reportedly puts chelsea up for sale

[JagSquared]

The Quad* is on, Everton might get relegated and Chelsea could go bust?

 

Who’s the red writing the script for this season?
 

 

 

 

*unlikely 

[Fugitive]

Just now, JagSquared said:

The Quad* is on, Everton might get relegated and Chelsea could go bust?

 

Who’s the red writing the script for this season?
 

 

 

 

*unlikely 

You forgot The Mancs becoming mid table nobodies.

[Fugitive]

The government will just extend the special licence they have to operate. They are all Tory cunts and the twats running the country won’t risk losing votes by letting them go bust.

[TheHowieLama]

Sold to the fella from the LA Dodgers.

[Bjornebye]

6 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Sold to the fella from the LA Dodgers.

I'm sure there will be nothing dodgy about it..... 

[Leyton388]

One thing is for sure. This new guy wont be putting in £1m a month to cover their shortfall in costs like Roman did. 

[Bobby Hundreds]

They should be packed into a transparent vinyl record sleeve and flung into space towards the dirtiest of black holes.

[polymerpunkah]

I hate the fucking Dodgers.

 

A seamless transition then.

[Razoray]

4 minutes ago, Leyton388 said:

One thing is for sure. This new guy wont be putting in £1m a month to cover their shortfall in costs like Roman did. 

£1.6b in 19 years. That's £84m every year (on average)

To put that into context Klopp has spent £605m in 6.5 years. Without Abramovich's yearly £84m, Chelsea would have had £505m less to spend. 

 

Unless the new Swiss/Yank owners are going to invest their own money - they won't - Chelsea are joining the other London clubs back in the pack. 

[Torvald Utne]

So who gets the money from the sale??

[alles ist gut]

2 minutes ago, fungus said:

So who gets the money from the sale??

Carrie Johnson.

[Bad Red Bull]

10 minutes ago, Razoray said:

£1.6b in 19 years. That's £84m every year (on average)

To put that into context Klopp has spent £605m in 6.5 years. Without Abramovich's yearly £84m, Chelsea would have had £505m less to spend. 

 

Unless the new Swiss/Yank owners are going to invest their own money - they won't - Chelsea are joining the other London clubs back in the pack. 

So you re saying Klopp has spent more?

[Anubis]

The new Chelsea owner looks like a bigger twat than Abramovic.

[Mudface]

Might be looking to renegotiate.

 

[clangers]

1 hour ago, Razoray said:

£1.6b in 19 years. That's £84m every year (on average)

To put that into context Klopp has spent £605m in 6.5 years. Without Abramovich's yearly £84m, Chelsea would have had £505m less to spend. 

 

Unless the new Swiss/Yank owners are going to invest their own money - they won't - Chelsea are joining the other London clubs back in the pack. 

Just goes to show how bent Chelsea have been over a couple of decades.

 

Given that Clearlake appear to be investing the majority of funding they'll definitely be back to being a club run on a sustainable footing with their new owners reaping a return from an increasing asset value over time, at best. No more big handouts to cover overspending.

[Razoray]

2 hours ago, Bad Red Bull said:

So you re saying Klopp has spent more?

No. Chelsea have spent £921m to Klopp's £605m time here - but they'd have had £500m less to spend if Abramovich wasn't propping them up. 

[A Red]

What an obnoxious fanbase they have. I had the misfortune to be stuck in a long conversation with a pair of them last night in the pub, the harrington/bomber jacket wearing, shaven headed (one of them), mid 50's cunts. I know I shouldn't generalise that all their fans are cunts that but fuck me these were.

 

It was the usual stuff about victims, Hillsborough, Heysel and booing the Queen. I stood my ground when really I should have walked away but I think me telling them that I was going to call them Asterisk and Obelisk nearly pushed one of them over the edge. When I left to get a taxi home I half expected for them to come out after me.

[Freddo]

What I can’t stand about this Chelsea takeover is they are now debt free. One of only four clubs in the world apparently. As well as City, psg, Leicester.

You have to laugh don’t you, two oils clubs and one where the owner helped to finance the Putin regime.

You can see why the likes of us and others are pissed off with this blatant disregard for financial rules.

Also, Chelsea were 1.6.billion in debt to Abrahamovich. That is now written off, is that fair. I don’t think it is. That debt issue should have been tackled when he was in situ. 
As for the fans, I’m lucky to only know one. Desperate for another owner to bankroll them rather than build anything sustainable. These Americans may well make a splash this summer but it won’t be sustained. 

[RoyHodgeGone]

The price keeps being reported as £4.25bn. Yet everything I see suggests the club valuation was £2.5bn. And where exactly is the money (£2.5bn?) going?

[VladimirIlyich]

On 02/06/2022 at 09:09, RoyHodgeGone said:

The price keeps being reported as £4.25bn. Yet everything I see suggests the club valuation was £2.5bn. And where exactly is the money (£2.5bn?) going?

Well its not going back to Abramovich now is it!

 

Sarcasm alert.

[Barrington Womble]

On 02/06/2022 at 09:09, RoyHodgeGone said:

The price keeps being reported as £4.25bn. Yet everything I see suggests the club valuation was £2.5bn. And where exactly is the money (£2.5bn?) going?

1.75bn is a supposed future investment. But that's just a promise, they don't have to commit to it because take over laws just don't work like that - like when H&G promised not to load the club with aquasitional debt. Then there's £2.5bn to buy the club, but that included paying the £1.5bn debt, so really they sold for £1bn. 

 

It was interesting I was watching someone from the WSJ talking about it. The PE firm buying them expects a very big return and is prepared to wait 10 years to get it. But they believe the path to that is to break away from the central premier League TV deal and go on a club based ppv model. And to further monetise kit deal, sponsorships and European revenues. I think they may be in for a bit of a shock, I'm sure revenues will increase, but I expect not as much as they think and just as importantly, any new revenues nearly always just puts more money into players pockets. It's why I think the ESL will still happen, as that assured clubs could only spend 70% of revenues on fees and wages. Leaving plenty of room for profit. 

[dockers_strike]

Well, well, well. What do you know? "Club executives under the previous regime had been forced to disclose significant unforeseen liabilities just days before the sale - initially worth a total of £2.5billion, with a further £1.75billion of future investment - was finally struck."

 

How much more finance was 'undisclosed' during Abramovich's time, one wonders? All this must surely raise further questions about how the shite are seemingly able to avoid the PL's FFP after acruing debts of over £350m.

 

Todd Boehly was permitted to hold back more than £100million from the Chelsea purchase amid concern the club will be hit with financial fair play punishments over liabilities under Roman Abramovich, Telegraph Sport can reveal.

 

Club executives under the previous regime had been forced to disclose significant unforeseen liabilities just days before the sale - initially worth a total of £2.5billion, with a further £1.75billion of future investment - was finally struck.

 

The dramatic last minute change in price was approved as a result of concerns the club could now face financial fair play punishments when Premier League and Uefa auditors are alerted.

 

Under the sanctioned Russian's ownership, Chelsea had received funding via parent companies in which tax liabilities were understood to have become increasingly difficult to unravel.

 

Checks by regulators after the club effectively became a frozen asset in March prompted Chelsea to declare potentially huge unpaid liabilities to Boehly at the 11th hour. The new American owner, who partnered with, among others, US private equity firm Clearlake Capital, was subsequently allowed to hold back a slice of the purchase price.

 

That was a contingency should the club be punished under Premier League profit and sustainability regulations, its current FFP structure. As a result, a reduced sum of around £2.3billion appears likely to end up in a foundation for war victims in the short term at least.

 

Boehly and co-owner Behdad Eghbali are representing the club at the Premier League’s annual general meeting in Harrogate this week where they have met the other 19 top-tier clubs for the first time. Ordinarily, Chelsea would be represented at those meetings by Bruce Buck, the chairman, and the club's chief executive, Guy Laurence.

 

Since 2003, Chelsea's financial ecosystem had been heavily reliant on offshore payments into the club and a series of interconnected companies. Last year's annual accounts for Fordstam Ltd, show Abramovich injected around £150million and withdrew around £130million to end the year loaning the club an overall £19.9million, and taking the total related-party loans to £1.514 billion.

 

The loans were due to be repaid to Camberley International Investments Ltd, a Jersey-based entity which was last month the target of a raid by authorities freezing billions of pounds of the Russian's assets. Abramovich had already agreed to write off the debt when he put the club up for sale at the start of March.

 

Other connected companies to Fordstam include Stamford Bridge Projects Ltd, which declared last week that it had issued one share for £54,010,782 after debt was converted to equity.

 

The financial set up under the new regime will be entirely different. Following a fraught three-month sale saga, Boehly had made commitments totalling £4.25billion, including the purchase price and subsequent 10-year spending commitments. His consortium fought off 11 serious rivals in a process overseen by Government after Abramovich formally put the club on the market on March 2.

 

The final hurdle in the deal was cleared a fortnight ago after Portugal, where Abramovich obtained a passport last year, and the European Union confirmed they had given the deal their green light. Initial proceeds from the sale are sitting in an escrow account while Government seeks assurances about a foundation for war victims being set up by former Unicef UK chief executive Mike Penrose.

 

On the playing side, Thomas Tuchel is expected to have around £200m at his disposal in the transfer market.

 

Los Angeles Dodgers co-owner Boehly shares "joint control and equal governance of the club” with main partner Clearlake Capital investment firm. Boehly is chairman of the holding company, backing up his status as controlling owner – a set-up reached by virtue of his robust working relationship with Clearlake chief Eghbali. Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss and US tycoon Mark Walter are the other main members of the consortium.

 

A Chelsea spokesman said when contacted by The Telegraph: “It is not unusual in these types of transactions, particularly deals completed in an accelerated timeframe, to withhold an amount related to any unforeseen liabilities that may arise from transactions that occurred prior to the sale.”

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/06/08/chelsea-risk-ffp-investigation-100m-held-back-sale-financial/

[TheHowieLama]

Every owner coming from a baseball background will be pushing for private TV deals. It is how they make their coin.

The Dodgers far moreso than anyone else.

[VladimirIlyich]

1 hour ago, dockers_strike said:

Well, well, well. What do you know? "Club executives under the previous regime had been forced to disclose significant unforeseen liabilities just days before the sale - initially worth a total of £2.5billion, with a further £1.75billion of future investment - was finally struck."

 

How much more finance was 'undisclosed' during Abramovich's time, one wonders? All this must surely raise further questions about how the shite are seemingly able to avoid the PL's FFP after acruing debts of over £350m.

 

Todd Boehly was permitted to hold back more than £100million from the Chelsea purchase amid concern the club will be hit with financial fair play punishments over liabilities under Roman Abramovich, Telegraph Sport can reveal.

 

Club executives under the previous regime had been forced to disclose significant unforeseen liabilities just days before the sale - initially worth a total of £2.5billion, with a further £1.75billion of future investment - was finally struck.

 

The dramatic last minute change in price was approved as a result of concerns the club could now face financial fair play punishments when Premier League and Uefa auditors are alerted.

 

Under the sanctioned Russian's ownership, Chelsea had received funding via parent companies in which tax liabilities were understood to have become increasingly difficult to unravel.

 

Checks by regulators after the club effectively became a frozen asset in March prompted Chelsea to declare potentially huge unpaid liabilities to Boehly at the 11th hour. The new American owner, who partnered with, among others, US private equity firm Clearlake Capital, was subsequently allowed to hold back a slice of the purchase price.

 

That was a contingency should the club be punished under Premier League profit and sustainability regulations, its current FFP structure. As a result, a reduced sum of around £2.3billion appears likely to end up in a foundation for war victims in the short term at least.

 

Boehly and co-owner Behdad Eghbali are representing the club at the Premier League’s annual general meeting in Harrogate this week where they have met the other 19 top-tier clubs for the first time. Ordinarily, Chelsea would be represented at those meetings by Bruce Buck, the chairman, and the club's chief executive, Guy Laurence.

 

Since 2003, Chelsea's financial ecosystem had been heavily reliant on offshore payments into the club and a series of interconnected companies. Last year's annual accounts for Fordstam Ltd, show Abramovich injected around £150million and withdrew around £130million to end the year loaning the club an overall £19.9million, and taking the total related-party loans to £1.514 billion.

 

The loans were due to be repaid to Camberley International Investments Ltd, a Jersey-based entity which was last month the target of a raid by authorities freezing billions of pounds of the Russian's assets. Abramovich had already agreed to write off the debt when he put the club up for sale at the start of March.

 

Other connected companies to Fordstam include Stamford Bridge Projects Ltd, which declared last week that it had issued one share for £54,010,782 after debt was converted to equity.

 

The financial set up under the new regime will be entirely different. Following a fraught three-month sale saga, Boehly had made commitments totalling £4.25billion, including the purchase price and subsequent 10-year spending commitments. His consortium fought off 11 serious rivals in a process overseen by Government after Abramovich formally put the club on the market on March 2.

 

The final hurdle in the deal was cleared a fortnight ago after Portugal, where Abramovich obtained a passport last year, and the European Union confirmed they had given the deal their green light. Initial proceeds from the sale are sitting in an escrow account while Government seeks assurances about a foundation for war victims being set up by former Unicef UK chief executive Mike Penrose.

 

On the playing side, Thomas Tuchel is expected to have around £200m at his disposal in the transfer market.

 

Los Angeles Dodgers co-owner Boehly shares "joint control and equal governance of the club” with main partner Clearlake Capital investment firm. Boehly is chairman of the holding company, backing up his status as controlling owner – a set-up reached by virtue of his robust working relationship with Clearlake chief Eghbali. Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss and US tycoon Mark Walter are the other main members of the consortium.

 

A Chelsea spokesman said when contacted by The Telegraph: “It is not unusual in these types of transactions, particularly deals completed in an accelerated timeframe, to withhold an amount related to any unforeseen liabilities that may arise from transactions that occurred prior to the sale.”

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/06/08/chelsea-risk-ffp-investigation-100m-held-back-sale-financial/

Sounds like Man City. I'm glad to see they were punished......Oh wait!

[Bobby Hundreds]

Nothing legitimate about their success their titles are as tinpot as City's. Maximum disrespect to the fuckers.