Chelsea 2022/2023 | THIS IS LAST YEARS THREAD YOU NUMPTIES

Status
Not open for further replies.
Devil_forever said:
Behind paywall, what does it say? Is the debt added onto the club?
Click to expand...
The financing arrangements consist of a roughly £300mn revolving credit facility and a £500mn term loan, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter, eclipsing the $650mn raised by Manchester City’s parent company last July.
A person close to Chelsea and its owners said that the club will not bear any of the interest expense associated with the debt because of the structure of the financing and all proceeds will go into the business.
They added that the owners are not pledging any assets or revenues associated with Chelsea’s regulated entities to obtain the financing.
Click to expand...
 

So basically Clearlake Capital are just taking a loan for themselves and investing the money into the club while they will take care of all costs associated with paying back the loan plus interests?

If that's true and the club itself won't be getting any of the debt loaded onto it, then to me that does not sound alarming in the slightest. Quite the opposite really because those funds are likely to be part of the £1.75 billion package the new owners have promised to invest into the running costs as well as the stadium project over the next ten years. If I'm understanding it correctly and everything is like I just wrote, this loan would in fact be the first sign those investment promises indeed hold some weight and weren't just empty talk to make it easier for them to buy the club.
 
They are setting up an operating account and the interest and debt probably helps reduce their tax obligations for the overall company. They could have set up a revolving account and put all the money in and then received no tax benefit, and probably created a tax liability going that route.
 
They've done it so they can put it into the squad, academy, and womens team. Branding and commercial activities too.

Was interesting to read Boehly and Eghbali chatting with the squad the other day in USA, saying that they'll invest heavily and whatever necessary for us to be successful.

This was what the Dodgers fans told us when they were in the running to buy us, albeit baseball is different of course, but they have no issues about paying to win, so to speak
 
hellhunter said:
Because of Kounde? The guy they chased like three years and still haven't signed?

Or Koulibaly?
Click to expand...
if you believe chelsea chased both for years, then surely you must, by logic, believe we did too. chelsea didn't need CBs before two defenders decided to run down their contracts and move to spain
 
mitchmouse said:
if you believe chelsea chased both for years, then surely you must, by logic, believe we did too. chelsea didn't need CBs before two defenders decided to run down their contracts and move to spain
Click to expand...

Three years is obviously an exaggeration by @hellhunter but Kounde was heavily linked with Chelsea last summer and came very close to signing near the end of the summer transfer window as Zouma's replacement. Fee was almost fully agreed and personal terms were agreed with the player, only for Sevilla to back out and increase their asking price from the verbally agreed €65M to the full release clause of €80M because they felt there wasn't enough time to sign a replacement.

Instead of signing Kounde for the increased price Chelsea ended up keeping Trevoh Chalobah which was great because an academy graduate made the squad instead, but now obviously the need for new CBs is more severe after recent departures of Rüdiger and Christensen. Now it looks like Kounde is very likely to sign over the weekend so if that happens everything will have worked out just fine.
 
Some serious copium in here. Yeah, £800m debt is absolutely fine, nothing to worry about at all. You're on the wrong forum if you're trying to convince us of that.
 
AltiUn said:
Some serious copium in here. Yeah, £800m debt is absolutely fine, nothing to worry about at all. You're on the wrong forum if you're trying to convince us of that.
Click to expand...
It’s not debt. As people have tried to explain they are technically lending the money to themselves so the funds can be recategorized as “capital debt”. This is done for reasons like taxes and is part of what they pledged to do when they purchased the club.

Clearlake …. Boehlys company… is one of the most experienced groups in the whole world at doing this, not amateurs, elected like politicians, and going to banks to beg for funds they have already spent.

They hired the. Dodger stadium architect as well, which makes me SUPER happy.
 
It's definitely debt, they're just obscuring the interest payments as dividends to the parent company. Opaque structure with tax benefits, possibly.

It's typical private equity move... Can expect prices to rocket in years to come and any possible extra way of making money explored...

They'll do the stadium because we make £2m odd less a home game than Utd and £800k less than Spurs new ground. Granted, they have huge debt from it.

They also have to keep us competitive and make top 4 for the revenue. So some positives.

Coach matters a lot too, which is why Utd fans only saw things when SAF retired.

We can still do well on the pitch with Tuchel I think.
 
Bluelion7 said:
It’s not debt. As people have tried to explain they are technically lending the money to themselves so the funds can be recategorized as “capital debt”. This is done for reasons like taxes and is part of what they pledged to do when they purchased the club.

Clearlake …. Boehlys company… is one of the most experienced groups in the whole world at doing this, not amateurs, elected like politicians, and going to banks to beg for funds they have already spent.

They hired the. Dodger stadium architect as well, which makes me SUPER happy.
Click to expand...
They’re hiding the debt to get around the takeover regulations.
It’s clear as day
 
cyberman said:
They’re hiding the debt to get around the takeover regulations.
It’s clear as day
Click to expand...
No … they negotiated how much they would spend on the stadium in their purchase proposal. The money is being borrowed from themselves. Classifying it as debt when you are making capital renovations is what you SHOULD do, for many reasons, not just taxes. THEN you qualify for additional benefits by forgiving debt … to yourself. It is a way of manipulating the financial systems that your club should be doing if they are owned by a capital investment firm …. Or even just people that know what they are doing.

Here, I will break it down to an even simpler: I have more than enough money to buy a million dollar house, but the mortgage rate, from a bank I own, is SO low, that it would be better to borrow money from the general lending pool, and keeping the money I would have used up front in higher earning accounts.
Their us a difference between using the mechanisms of borrowing, even from yourself, and being IN debt: ie owing massive sums of already spent money to financial institutions you have no control over, and are trying to make money off of your plight.

This may be frustrating to some… but Chelsea went from being owned by a really rich guy, to be owned by a much richer group that specializes in sporting finance.
 
cyberman said:
They’re hiding the debt to get around the takeover regulations.
It’s clear as day
Click to expand...
We had the most scrutinized sale in English football history with even the Government looking over the deal. They aren’t in a position to hide anything. In fact, it’s highly likely they pitched this move during the process. I’m comfortable with what’s being done.
 
Mb194dc said:
It's definitely debt, they're just obscuring the interest payments as dividends to the parent company. Opaque structure with tax benefits, possibly.

It's typical private equity move... Can expect prices to rocket in years to come and any possible extra way of making money explored...

They'll do the stadium because we make £2m odd less a home game than Utd and £800k less than Spurs new ground. Granted, they have huge debt from it.

They also have to keep us competitive and make top 4 for the revenue. So some positives.

Coach matters a lot too, which is why Utd fans only saw things when SAF retired.

We can still do well on the pitch with Tuchel I think.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I do think this is going to very difficult for some fans (not you) to get their head around as they have only ever known the club under the ownership of the cash cow Abramovich.

Its quite clear you will be operating like a normal club from now on and this move highlights that money no longer grows on trees. If you want to spend big money then it has to come from somewhere and ultimately needs to be paid back.
 
Mb194dc said:
It's definitely debt, they're just obscuring the interest payments as dividends to the parent company. Opaque structure with tax benefits, possibly.

It's typical private equity move... Can expect prices to rocket in years to come and any possible extra way of making money explored...

They'll do the stadium because we make £2m odd less a home game than Utd and £800k less than Spurs new ground. Granted, they have huge debt from it.

They also have to keep us competitive and make top 4 for the revenue. So some positives.

Coach matters a lot too, which is why Utd fans only saw things when SAF retired.

We can still do well on the pitch with Tuchel I think.
Click to expand...

Yes, that’s exactly what’s going to happen. The financial burden of servicing the debt will be entirely on Chelsea’s operations. It won’t be done directly but it will be done through dividend payments. I’m pretty sure that it’s perfectly serviceable, but the reality for Chelsea is that this investment will come at a cost, as all investments typically do. The question is whether the benefits will exceed the cost, and in all likelihood they will. But most, if not all, of that benefit, will go to the owners and fans can likely expect higher prices in the future.
 
The debt is essentially boehlys and clearlakes and the club has zero liability. New ownership also cannot take any money out of the club at all. 300m is for the squad on revolving credit facility, which is essentially spend 300m, pay it back, spend it again, pay it back rinse and repeat.

500 is for working capital purposes, probably towards merchandising and branding and what not. I'm no economist, and thats the most basic understanding of it that i have...
 
So finally Kounde is done, very good signing.
 
Still wants one of Kimpembe or Gvardiol after Kounde, I have to say im very impressed by our business so far, but one of those 2 on top would be real impressive. Albeit Kimpembe is marmite amongst fans it seems.

I think the Adama Traore deal is a possibility, too
 
duffer said:
A wingback maybe, Traore? No chance.
Click to expand...
Haven’t seen that name mentioned for over a year now. We definitely need a right wing back (and imo a LWB too) but definitely don’t see him as being the answer. Even as a back up.
 
SirReginald said:
Haven’t seen that name mentioned for over a year now. We definitely need a right wing back (and imo a LWB too) but definitely don’t see him as being the answer. Even as a back up.
Click to expand...

I have a funny feeling Kenedy might be part of the squad this coming season as cover on the left. I've heard Ampadu can play right wing back but I can't remember ever seeing it.
 
SirReginald said:
Haven’t seen that name mentioned for over a year now. We definitely need a right wing back (and imo a LWB too) but definitely don’t see him as being the answer. Even as a back up.
Click to expand...

I'd try to hijack the pursuit of Filip Kostic for LWB target. West Ham have bid around €15M for him today but it doesn't look like he's too keen to join them. Unsure whether he'd be willing to join if he's not a starter but would definitely send out some feelers. Probably would need to get rid of Alonso and Emerson first though.

RWB backup option seems to me like it should be a priority as soon as the CBs have been sorted out with the Koulibaly+Kounde signings. Third CB not necessarily needed if Colwill can be persuaded into staying in a rotation role.

duffer said:
I have a funny feeling Kenedy might be part of the squad this coming season as cover on the left. I've heard Ampadu can play right wing back but I can't remember ever seeing it.
Click to expand...

Matt Law also said Kounde is being considered as an option for RWB. I personally don't see him being a success there though.
 
duffer said:
I have a funny feeling Kenedy might be part of the squad this coming season as cover on the left. I've heard Ampadu can play right wing back but I can't remember ever seeing it.
Click to expand...
Kenedy and Sarr are two of the worst footballers I’ve seen play in a Chelsea shirt. I hope neither are anywhere near seeing the pitch for us this season.

I wonder what happens with Alonso at this stage. The Barca links have died down unlike with Azpi. With Emerson back we can’t really keep both he and Alonso so I wonder what we do. With Koundé coming in we have cover for Reece.
 
Orc said:
Kenedy and Sarr are two of the worst footballers I’ve seen play in a Chelsea shirt. I hope neither are anywhere near seeing the pitch for us this season.

I wonder what happens with Alonso at this stage. The Barca links have died down unlike with Azpi. With Emerson back we can’t really keep both he and Alonso so I wonder what we do. With Koundé coming in we have cover for Reece.
Click to expand...
Sarr played mostly when team was struggling as a unit. He is not much bad in some metrics for defensive player. Tuchel likes him so will be in squad will see how much will he improve?
 
Why doesn't Emerson get more of a look ? He's a good player whenever I've watched him
 
Gringo said:
Why doesn't Emerson get more of a look ? He's a good player whenever I've watched him
Click to expand...
Have good technique and bit of pace but lacked determination and application.In five minute time he can be look like very good player then turn to shit in next moment.
 
WeePat said:
Koulibaly and Kounde were always my ideal CB signings. Chuffed to bits we, seemingly, have got them both.
Click to expand...

Same for me. Those two signed with Colwill also coming back was always my plan to replace Rüdi, AC and Azpi. Now just got to hope the club doesn't feck up the last bit by signing Kimpembe or whoever and end up losing Colwill in the process.

Sterling, Koulibaly and Kounde really are great signings so far IMO. Now just need to get a couple more quality additions and the window will have been a home run.
 
Gringo said:
Why doesn't Emerson get more of a look ? He's a good player whenever I've watched him
Click to expand...

He often takes bad angles for his speed travking back. There are times he just gives up when being beat down the field. His biggest problem is his disbelieve in himself.
 
Still some room left in that £200m Boehly said was the budget. I have seen people say he would go to £300m for the right transfers, but not seen a direct quote from him.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.