Si
Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN
- Thread starter Ali Dia
- Start date
Si
I like it!
lets see just how many of the 20+ first team players they have on loan get sold b/c there is no way they are going to pay all those wages like Roman did when he stockpiled all those players
The loan players salaries are paid by the loan club. The reason they will sell is because of the new limit on players you can loan out.
A decent chunk of them are out of contract anyway but yea, there will be less on loan next season for sure.
Remarkable history of success. 1 league title in 100 years before Russian oil money. Remarkable.
I dunno, Chelsea's high manager turnover rate actually worked out very well for them in the end. Maybe it's not such a positive that Tuchel will get more time than those who came before him if he hits a rough patch.
I remember the new limits didn't have any effect on Chelsea, it could be business as usual.
That take is offside.
Some managers have deservedly been sacked. Others were rather harshly treated, but because Chelsea just kept on winning in various competitions the harsh sackings were always explained away with 'but look at what they won after'. Would Chelsea have won more titles between 2010 and 2015 had we stuck with Carlo? I definitely think we would have won at least one more title and maybe a CL between 2006 and 2010 had we stuck with Mourinho for a bit longer.
If Chelsea sold for 4.25b….
What is the price for Man Utd!!!
What is the price for Man Utd!!!
Less.
Every club builds a bigger stadium. Why when it doesn’t matter?
It’s a silly take. Of course it matters. It just hasn’t mattered to Chelsea as they’ve been funded by a Russian Billionaire rather than ran like a sustainable club.
Chelsea sold for 2.5 billion, the other 1.75 billion is commitment to further invest into the club. I imagine a large part of it is for the redevelopment of Stamford Bridge.
4.25bn? Ouchie ouch. That's definitely Roman's loan paid back. So how much of it is leveraged debt? Or is this still confidential?
u kidding Right? Despite our bad last 10 years, we are still one of the most attractive club in the world!! With a bit more structure and right owners, we have unlimited possibilities
None I hope. There's supposedly an anti-Glazers stipulation included in the official purchase agreement.
The sale price for the club is not £4.25B. The club was valued at £2.5B, which has been used to fund humanitarian charities in Ukraine. The remaining £1.75B is an apparently legally binding agreement to be invested in the club over the next decade, as stipulated by Abramovich to properly screen incoming owners. So whilst the incoming owners are committing to spend £4.25B, it's incorrect to say that's the sale price.
There's no leveraged debt involved. This was a disqualifying factor - a big part of why the Ricketts were not seriously considered.
If loans were not used is it a cash purchase with Boehly's group? Sorry I've not been able to read that tweet yet.
Edit: and the details are behind a paywall.
Yes exactly - no loans were taken out; this was a stipulation of the sale. Prospective bids funded by leveraged buyout were dismissed more or less immediately.
Clearlake Capital are funding the majority of the bid, but Boehly will be front and centre from a management perspective.
Chelsea owners promised they will pledge money to Charity.
Meanwhile, Amber Herd has pledged the entire universe to charity.
In other news, Elon Musk is building a new space ship.
Meanwhile, Amber Herd has pledged the entire universe to charity.
In other news, Elon Musk is building a new space ship.
How does that work then? The name itself sounds like a hedge fund. Let me Google what business they're in.
Edit: here's a blurb from their website directly. Worrying use of financial instrument speak:
"
Clearlake has a flexible mandate to invest in both private and public transactions across the capital structure in debt or equity securities in the lower and middle market through buyouts, corporate divestitures, recapitalizations and reorganizations. Clearlake believes these situations provide attractive investment opportunities as they are often overlooked relative to large, widely followed restructurings and corporate buyouts."
Last edited:
If Chelsea is going for £4.25Bn then the Glazers will want close to 6-7Bn for United.
I mean, I don't think taking a blurb from their website is necessarily indicative of anything, especially when you've ignored the word "flexible". Clearly they think Chelsea has not been marketed optimally under Abramovich - which is more or less a given at this point as that was never a point of focus for him.
Also, not sure what you mean vis a vis how that works? Clearlake has something like $70 billion under management - they aren't keen on saddling a club they're backing with debt; their prerogative is to further boost the value of the club to improve their ROI. By all accounts, Boehly's consortium was preferred because they were happy to agree to the terms set ensuring Chelsea's status going forward - hence the further 1.75B commitment.
Again, that's not the price for Chelsea.
It's all irrelevant as The Glazers have zero incentive to sell.
Nah, Mourinho can't stay more than 3 years, he'll implode, even at his peak.
So with the investment from Clearlake (their owners are apparently big football people), there were agreements that it had to not be debt financed i.e. The company itself purchased its stake directly and not via investor funds or a loan. So basically just like any other business buying a stake in the club.
Apparently it was sold for 2.5 billion.
The rest of it is what they pledged to inject into the club in an unspecified time frame.
The rest of it is what they pledged to inject into the club in an unspecified time frame.
They sound like they are going to do a good job and invest a lot.
So that means Roman only took about 500 mil. That’s unreal. He’s been god to their club and left them in good order to be fair.
What?
Sold for £2.5bn in the end which is remarkable. As others have mentioned we have no debt tied to this deal so we’re starting from scratch, I also think the £1.75bn pledged investment over 10 years has to be done without loading debt onto the club also. So all in all a fantastic base to start from.
I’d imagine £750m will go into the stadium and the other £1bn will be spread out as £100m per season of general investment.
I am however not naive, Clearlake are still an investment company and will have to get a return after 10 years. I think they‘ll aim to return the club to BE and raise the value of the club above the £4.25bn. To do this they will have to raise sponsorship (new stadium and sponsors) and lower the overall wage bill. It can be done but we won’t be spunking massive fees every summer, it‘s going to have to be more considered now. With our starting point, the academy and growth potential I’m not overly worried.
I’d imagine £750m will go into the stadium and the other £1bn will be spread out as £100m per season of general investment.
I am however not naive, Clearlake are still an investment company and will have to get a return after 10 years. I think they‘ll aim to return the club to BE and raise the value of the club above the £4.25bn. To do this they will have to raise sponsorship (new stadium and sponsors) and lower the overall wage bill. It can be done but we won’t be spunking massive fees every summer, it‘s going to have to be more considered now. With our starting point, the academy and growth potential I’m not overly worried.
Good bye to the deals of lukaku,pulisic,morotta and welcome to more deals of Kante, azpilicuetta,kovasic please.
Welcome to the American dream from the Russian dream fellow Chelsea fans. Never dull to follow this club. Many daydreamers had to wake up from Chelsea going to fold.
Welcome to the American dream from the Russian dream fellow Chelsea fans. Never dull to follow this club. Many daydreamers had to wake up from Chelsea going to fold.