Yeah this is spot on - you've pinpointed what the actual gamble is. Boehly et al are betting on themselves and their past experience in improving commercial revenues. As you say if it stagnates it may become problematic.
Chelsea 2022/2023 | THIS IS LAST YEARS THREAD YOU NUMPTIES
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
- Status
Yeah this is spot on - you've pinpointed what the actual gamble is. Boehly et al are betting on themselves and their past experience in improving commercial revenues. As you say if it stagnates it may become problematic.
Aren't both of our main shirt sponsors (Three and Whalefin) up after the current season? Be interesting to see who Boehly & co. can find to replace them and at what value. If they can find something with better value that'd be the first concrete step towards increasing the commercial revenues.
Could be awkward considering you haven’t even got conference league football as it stands.
Yep you are correct - the Three sponsorship will conclude this summer after a 3 year deal - think that's very unlikely to be extended (and thank feck because it is perhaps the ugliest sponsor logo in world football).
WhaleFin ran into liquidity issues in the wake of the FTX catastrophe so that'll end earlier than initially agreed - this summer as well.
Somehow I doubt missing out on the UCL once matters too much as far as the value of a multi-year sponsorship agreement goes.
In any case there are definitely ways around that. I'm pretty sure I remember reading that you lot have clauses in your main sponsors that decrease in value if you miss out on CL qualification couple of years in a row so just need to include something like that in there and no problem, I suppose.
We already know how good the new ownership group are at pitching their 'long term vision' to people around the game whether it's players, agents or other clubs they've been doing business with so it's probably a decent guess to assume they'll be similarly good in pitching it to prospective sponsors as well.
It’s still negotiating from a position of weakness. We do have those clauses but I guess it depends if sponsors see Chelsea with non champions League being as strong a brand as United out side of the champions league.
If he’s half as good at convincing the sponsors as he is the fans, you’ll be alright. I’m amazed at the the lack of worry amongst the Chelsea fan base on here.
Well I think it's also fair to say that Boehly and his group are likely to be better at this than the Glazers are/were given they have previous experience in driving commercial revenue for stagnant clubs.
I'm no Boehly stan but it's pretty clear Chelsea have rested on their laurels for years now, secure in knowing that daddy Roman's billions would always be there as a warm cuddly safety blanket. I definitely agree that Chelsea aren't as strong a brand as United are or were when the Glazers took over, but I also think there is potentially more untapped potential in the Chelsea brand than there was for United at the time if that makes sense?
While our brand isn’t as strong as yours, I don’t think Champions League is going to affect it to much. We still have a global audience and brand recognition and that is more important for companies wanting their own brand exposure. If results and success really played a large part then you would have suffered yourselves given the distinct lack of trophies and very little threat of a challenge for the best part of a decade with no sign of that changing just yet.
Aside from maybe one Chelsea poster on here, and I'm sure everyone knows who I'm talking about, I would say most see the good things and the bad things. It's not that there's no worry, it's more like people just generally choose to focus on the positives, of which there are undoubtedly many, than just continually moan about things and bash the club together with oppo fans?
I'm not sure if that makes sense to you because a lot of what I'm seeing on this forum is United fans moaning and being toxic about pretty much anything United-related when you're not doing well on the pitch so maybe it's confusing to see people somewhat optimistic about the future even if things aren't perfect right now?
I won’t bother replying individually to you, but you all make fair points. I don’t see a big amount of growth coming on the horizon, like the Glazers had when taking over with the tv deals, hence the Glazers selling now.
Maybe Bohley will have some kind of genius to what he’s doing to grow the club, and more money will be available to buy players. The big question mark is the success. From what we’ve seen so far, I really would be surprised if this kind of transfer dealing led to titles.
Maybe Bohley will have some kind of genius to what he’s doing to grow the club, and more money will be available to buy players. The big question mark is the success. From what we’ve seen so far, I really would be surprised if this kind of transfer dealing led to titles.
I think you're right to raise questions! What is at least encouraging from Chelsea fans' perspective (if I can presume to speak for us collectively) is that there seems to be a definite plan in place that has not really been attempted before.
Maybe it'll be a disaster but at least we're trying something interesting! And again, given that this ownership group has done something similarly innovative with the Dodgers, that is encouraging (though I definitely agree with you that many have drunk far too much Boehly Kool-Aid without considering that there are, in fact, differences between baseball and football).
I must say, I am quite pleased with the transfer strategy but I’m also aware of the risks. We are buying young players with decent experience for their age, on long term contracts. We also have a lot of young graduates of our own. We have the good experience around these like Azpi, Thiago, Kovacic and Kante.
Badiashile is a great example. He has played a lot of games for a 21 year old. Mudryk is similar and has Champions League experience too.
I’d be very careful with Wes Fofana though. He should be given a month or two to get up to speed and used as a squad player until the medical staff are completely confident he has recovered. We have good cover in defence at present. Fofana and Badiashile look a very promising pairing for the future.
Badiashile is a great example. He has played a lot of games for a 21 year old. Mudryk is similar and has Champions League experience too.
I’d be very careful with Wes Fofana though. He should be given a month or two to get up to speed and used as a squad player until the medical staff are completely confident he has recovered. We have good cover in defence at present. Fofana and Badiashile look a very promising pairing for the future.
They are setting a base. Not only can they increase avenues by which they show and make revenue in the future, they can also offset whatever they need to with contributions to women’s football, infrastructure, etc.
They could also just agree to pay the luxury tax fines. I mean, they pencil in nearly 200m in pic tax fines into their yearly budget for baseball.
The end result though is that people think they can’t buy out or move off these contracts if they need to, and that’s a mistaken assumption.
But the ideal, in the near and far future, is that your base of talent and pipeline is strong enough that if you have to spend massive amounts to get rid of a player or buy a particular player it will be fairly easy to do without ruffling feathers. You would t expect to be having to purchase 16 players two or three years from now certainly.
The City model shows this to be the case: now that they have the structure in place they actually spend relatively little compared to the image people have of them.
On Badiashile: yes, of course the money makes a difference. But they switched courses to him from Gvardiol REAL fast after Vivell officially assumed his role (like 2days?). Gvardiol is great, but Badiashile can be as well. If they hadn’t felt they were getting a similar level player they wouldn’t have switched so quickly.
They could also just agree to pay the luxury tax fines. I mean, they pencil in nearly 200m in pic tax fines into their yearly budget for baseball.
The end result though is that people think they can’t buy out or move off these contracts if they need to, and that’s a mistaken assumption.
But the ideal, in the near and far future, is that your base of talent and pipeline is strong enough that if you have to spend massive amounts to get rid of a player or buy a particular player it will be fairly easy to do without ruffling feathers. You would t expect to be having to purchase 16 players two or three years from now certainly.
The City model shows this to be the case: now that they have the structure in place they actually spend relatively little compared to the image people have of them.
On Badiashile: yes, of course the money makes a difference. But they switched courses to him from Gvardiol REAL fast after Vivell officially assumed his role (like 2days?). Gvardiol is great, but Badiashile can be as well. If they hadn’t felt they were getting a similar level player they wouldn’t have switched so quickly.
I approve of this strategy. What is the going exchange rate with Serie A? If it amounts to anything over 6 points I’d pay it =)
Gotta love how everyone believed our spending would dry up after the sale of the club to now believing that we bid for everything.
Mildly amusing.
Bid 170m for Hierre wego ffs
He does sound like an interestingly exotic player to be fair.Bid 170m for Hierre wego ffs
Reminds me when Sky Sports News got duped when they claimed Aberdeen had signed Yerdas Selzavon!
Last edited:
I know Boehly had to commit to investing a certain amount of money into the club when he bought them but does he realise he doesn’t have to do it all in 2 windows?
Reportedly in advanced talks to sign right back Malo Gusto.
Another area we need strengthening with James out injured.
Another area we need strengthening with James out injured.
I’m sure he does. As I’m sure he realises that he doesn’t have to wait for a timetable as set by opposition fans and media as to when he can fix his team.
8 yr deals etc no longer allowed from summer 2023. Will be surprised if Gusto and Enzo Fernandez dont come this window, and stick them on 7/8 yr deals while we can.
You're allowed to hand out longer contracts than 5 years, but you have to pay off the transfer fee on the books within the first 5.
Gusto, Enzo, Mudryk, Joao Felix, Madueke, Badiashile, Santos and Fofana would be some window, considering it is 31 days long.
Also rumours [which i would file under BS] of Anthony Gordon and Amadou Onana being wanted aswell, but loaned back
ah right. Still makes more sense to sign Enzo Fernandez now, and/or Gusto.
Interesting because from an outsider looking in your transfer 'strategy' looks like the equivalent of loading a shotgun with makeup and firing it into your own face.
Mudryk looked good in his cameo though. I'll grant you that.
Activate the release clause and he's yours. What's another 100m on top of the 460m Boehly already spent.
Clearlake have to spend at least 1.5 billion, might as well do it now.
Well yeah but they can’t afford that. So for all intents and purposes they need to buy them now on 8-year contracts.
Won't they all be 5 year contracts, with the 'option' for another 2-3 years should Chelsea want to activate it?
So they get all the benefit of spreading the cost over 7-8 years, but non of the risk.
The proposed new UEFA rules say you can’t spread the cost of the transfer fee over more than 5 years. So the option wouldn’t make a difference.
Call me a homer all you want but it's ridiculous that UEFA are already moving to crack down on this but will stand idly by as Man City signs their umpteenth fake sponsorship with yet another company that doesn't actually exist
I was more talking about what Chelsea are doing now, more than the new rules they have had to bring in.
That signing feels like ages ago. He’s practically a Chelsea veteran in the team now.
If Boehly’s smart he’ll do the same and there’ll be a rule change by Friday.
Oh yeah, everything goes now. 5+3 contracts, 8 year contracts. They can do whatever they like.
Exactly. Ridiculous, how are they able to be this proactive with Chelsea but have allowed the likes of city to do bent commercial deals?
Starting next summer. This window the deal can still be over the entire length of the contract.
The timing suggest this may have been what's pushed us to go for Gusto and Enzo, which would be hilarious if so.
- Status