Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN

  • Abramovich was loosely linked to Putin
  • Russia invaded Ukraine, under Putin’s command
  • Abramovich tried to angle his ownership of Chelsea as a “force for the good” while also underhandedly looking to offload the club, as UK assets owned by Russians were being sanctioned and seized by the UK Government
  • UK Government sanctioned Chelsea and essentially said you have X amount of time before we remove the license for Chelsea as a business to operate (at which point they couldn’t sell anything including tickets, do employment contracts etc) and in order for the business license to be approved to continue the club had to be sold…. But again Russian assets were being seized by UK Government.
  • UK Government promised to use those seized assets a foundation for Ukrainian victims of war
  • Stipulation was agreed club would be sold, but under condition buyer committed X amount to be spent with Y amount of time. Basically buy the club but you have to also invest 1.75bn within a few years too
Basically once the war commenced the government seized Russian assets in the UK to punish Russia/influence powerful Russian people. Businesses included, and if not seized they were sanctioned and in Chelsea’s case they basically said if Roman doesn’t sell the club then Chelsea is no longer allowed to operate as a Football Club. Either sell the club and all the money is seized by the government and put into a frozen bank account (until audited and approved) for Ukrainian spending, or Chelsea basically just shuts down.
[/QUOTE]

:lol:

Loosely
 
Sky1981 said:
He wasnt exactly given a choice.

Giving it to charity (in this case Ukrainian war victims) was his last efford to at least get something

It was wrong in my eyes. He wasn't even proven to have anything directly to do with the whole war
Click to expand...
Abramovic is a thief, same as any other oligarch. Taking his shit away was the right thing to do, shame it took a war for it to happen.
 
Loosely linked. :lol::lol:
The surprise displayed by chelsea fans when abramovich wants to funnel money into their war efforts are genuinely surprising.
 
I don't quite understand why someone who was sanctioned and forced to sell needs to sign off on this now. Just ignore him surely? He paid the money into a bank account ages ago, it's just sat there.

And reading the article, at the time of the sale he said this "Abramovich's press office said he 'wanted the proceeds to be transferred to a charitable foundation for the needs of the victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.' That's pretty clear. Maybe at the time someone should've said "er no, you have feck all say in what happens to the money" rather than ignoring it and hoping he would forget.
 
duffer said:
I don't quite understand why someone who was sanctioned and forced to sell needs to sign off on this now. Just ignore him surely? He paid the money into a bank account ages ago, it's just sat there.

And reading the article, at the time of the sale he said this "Abramovich's press office said he 'wanted the proceeds to be transferred to a charitable foundation for the needs of the victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.' That's pretty clear. Maybe at the time someone should've said "er no, you have feck all say in what happens to the money" rather than ignoring it and hoping he would forget.
Click to expand...
The club was effectively forcibly taken off his hands, because the UK has a semblance of rule of law and due process they couldn’t take the club without paying him.

Abramovitch was in a position to dictate how the proceeds would be used. The alternative is that he simply allowed Chelsea to fold or he liquidated the club. One of Englands biggest clubs and which most of the Tory toffs support, the government wasn’t going to let that happen.
 
redNATION said:
The club was effectively forcibly taken off his hands, because the UK has a semblance of rule of law and due process they couldn’t take the club without paying him.

Abramovitch was in a position to dictate how the proceeds would be used. The alternative is that he simply allowed Chelsea to fold or he liquidated the club. One of Englands biggest clubs and which most of the Tory toffs support, the government wasn’t going to let that happen.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that should've been sorted before they forced the sale through? Roman literally put out a statement at the saying the money was going to Russians and Ukrainian victims of the war. Did the UK government not notice?

I'm of the opinion that the UK government should just say "feck you Roman, it's our money now" but if they won't do that, I don't see how they can complain that he wants to spread out the money, given that's exactly what he said would happen.

As for "which most of the Tory toffs support" is utter, utter, utter bollocks. The vast majority of MPs (tory or otherwise) and "toffs" don't give a single shit about football, unless it's a PR move.
 
duffer said:
Don't you think that should've been sorted before they forced the sale through? Roman literally put out a statement at the saying the money was going to Russians and Ukrainian victims of the war. Did the UK government not notice?

I'm of the opinion that the UK government should just say "feck you Roman, it's our money now" but if they won't do that, I don't see how they can complain that he wants to spread out the money, given that's exactly what he said would happen.

As for "which most of the Tory toffs support" is utter, utter, utter bollocks. The vast majority of MPs (tory or otherwise) and "toffs" don't give a single shit about football, unless it's a PR move.
Click to expand...

This, it's no coincidence that most tory supporting papers like to try and demean footballers and their wives as thicko's and materialistic wags and can't imagine a tory party full of xenophobia and racists enjoy seeing so many foreign and black people praised, worshipped and getting paid massive wages.
 
WeePat said:
It didn’t seem clear to me. Fair enough if it was clear to everyone else but at the time I thought he was heavily implying it would go to Ukrainians only.
Click to expand...

That’s how it looked to me at the time as well. Carefully worded to paint Russians as also potential victims in the war. Although that was just a statement to the press. Which surely isn’t legally binding. It’s what was said in whatever paperwork he signed that matters.
 
duffer said:
Everyone knew he was talking about both sides, didn't they? I don't see how anyone can be surprised, his statement was pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. On the contrary, it was obvious at the time he made it that any proceeds to Russia would be out of the question, and it was widely reported as intended for Ukraine.
 
justsomebloke said:
No it wasn't. On the contrary, it was obvious at the time he made it that any proceeds to Russia would be out of the question, and it was widely reported as intended for Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Make compromise and use those fund to needy people. No point in blaming each other when millions of people need immediate assistants.

Just make sure it will be used for rehabilitation purpose alone. Ukrainian or Russian people whoever need assistance in war torn area make sure they get help.
 
justsomebloke said:
No it wasn't. On the contrary, it was obvious at the time he made it that any proceeds to Russia would be out of the question, and it was widely reported as intended for Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Abramovich's press office said he 'wanted the proceeds to be transferred to a charitable foundation for the needs of the victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.'.

That's the only statement he made about where he wanted the money to go as far as I know. If you can post a quote from him or his press office saying it would only go to Ukrainians, post it, I'm happy to be educated on this.
 
harms said:
He wasn’t loosely linked to Putin, he’s been closely linked with him for more than 20 years.
Click to expand...

Abramovich got his money buying assets from the USSR at knockdown prices in the 90s and selling them at market value later, essentially. Highly probable the auctions were rigged mafia style, though no one can prove it exactly... This is hardly news.... He was close to Yeltsin and Putin. Though there's no evidence Abramovich has anything to do with the Russian government directly or the invasion. He's allegedly a Russian gangster, pretty much... All that is known since before he bought the club.

Andycoleno9 said:
Who can explain to me all that Chelsea sale? It was his club but he was forced to sell it without getting his money? Too many holes in my understanding of that whole process. What if he refused to sell it? Where is that money?

Any kind person to explain it (short version is enough:)).
Click to expand...

Forced to give the club away or face it being liquidated due to the sanctions imposed on the club by the Boris Johnson lead UK government. The sale money is due to go to the victims of the ongoing war. Will rumble on I guess with arguments on exactly where it does go.
 
Mb194dc said:
Though there's no evidence Abramovich has anything to do with the Russian government directly or the invasion. He's allegedly a Russian gangster, pretty much... All that is known since before he bought the club.
Click to expand...
Thanks for foreignsplaining Russian politics to me but you’re wrong, there’s tons of it (of his connections with the government & Putin directly, not with the invasion — he was quite obviously against it). He’s not as close to Putin as, say, Rotenbergs or Roldugin but he has been affiliated with Putin forever — not that he’s had much of a choice. When Putin came to power he eliminated independent oligarchs — those who refused to bend the knee were either imprisoned (like Khodorkovsky) or banished (like Berezovsky).
 
Rajiztar said:
Make compromise and use those fund to needy people. No point in blaming each other when millions of people need immediate assistants.

Just make sure it will be used for rehabilitation purpose alone. Ukrainian or Russian people whoever need assistance in war torn area make sure they get help.
Click to expand...

There's no way to offer assistance to needy people on the Russian side, or make sure that is for "rehabilitation purposes" alone. Above all because Russia doesn't give humanitarian organisations access on their side of the frontline. Also, of course the whole "war torn area" is in Ukraine. There is no way a single penny of those funds are released to Russia, and nor should they be.
 
Rajiztar said:
Make compromise and use those fund to needy people. No point in blaming each other when millions of people need immediate assistants.

Just make sure it will be used for rehabilitation purpose alone. Ukrainian or Russian people whoever need assistance in war torn area make sure they get help.
Click to expand...

Which Russian people are in need of assistance in a war torn area? Which areas in Russia are war torn? Or do you want to use the money to help Putin buy Ladas for the mothers and widows of the dead Russian occupants?
 
duffer said:
Abramovich's press office said he 'wanted the proceeds to be transferred to a charitable foundation for the needs of the victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.'.

That's the only statement he made about where he wanted the money to go as far as I know. If you can post a quote from him or his press office saying it would only go to Ukrainians, post it, I'm happy to be educated on this.
Click to expand...

And I'm happy to oblige. What he says in the statement is actually " The foundation will be for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine."

Statement from Roman Abramovich | News | Official Site | Chelsea Football Club (chelseafc.com)
 
klsv said:
Which Russian people are in need of assistance in a war torn area? Which areas in Russia are war torn? Or do you want to use the money to help Putin buy Ladas for the mothers and widows of the dead Russian occupants?
Click to expand...
Nobody talking about giving money to Putin. War torn area in Ukraine have Russian ethnic people too. This needless ego will delay money to reach needy people.How critical timely help for them these politics will never understand.

Just make compromise and help needy people. It's pointless to have money in bank that s purpose is to serve needy people in war torn area.
 
Rajiztar said:
Nobody talking about giving money to Putin. War torn area in Ukraine have Russian ethnic people too. This needless ego will delay money to reach needy people.How critical timely help for them these politics will never understand.

Just make compromise and help needy people. It's pointless to have money in bank that s purpose is to serve needy people in war torn area.
Click to expand...

The war isn't between ethnic Russians and Ukraine, and just because a Ukrainian citizen is a russian-speaker, that doesn't make them non-Ukrainian or put them on the other side. And sorry, if you think it's just a question of releasing the money in the bank and then it will descend on "needy people" everywhere, you should consider the possibility that the world is a little bit more complex than you think.
 
justsomebloke said:
The war isn't between ethnic Russians and Ukraine, and just because a Ukrainian citizen is a russian-speaker, that doesn't make them non-Ukrainian or put them on the other side. And sorry, if you think it's just a question of releasing the money in the bank and then it will descend on "needy people" everywhere, you should consider the possibility that the world is a little bit more complex than you think.
Click to expand...
That's why I say these things more important than idiotic politics. Those people who suffered need immediate help. These politics of who should get money and who don't can wait.

Roman won't get anything from West hereafter. He won't bow to west demand either. If west want to use the money then try and make compromise on middle ground and use it meaningfully.
 
Rajiztar said:
That's why I say these things more important than idiotic politics. Those people who suffered need immediate help. These politics of who should get money and who don't can wait.

Roman won't get anything from West hereafter. He won't bow to west demand either. If west want to use the money then try and make compromise on middle ground and use it meaningfully.
Click to expand...

And what middle ground is that? Which people exactly on the Russian side is it who need assistance, and with what? And who is going to provide it to them using Roman's money?
 
justsomebloke said:
And what middle ground is that? Which people exactly on the Russian side is it who need assistance, and with what? And who is going to provide it to them using Roman's money?
Click to expand...
That's government job mate. They should find solution and find way to reach money to needy people. No point in bigging up ego and left people to suffer who need immediate assistance.
 
Rajiztar said:
That's government job mate. They should find solution and find way to reach money to needy people. No point in bigging up ego and left people to suffer who need immediate assistance.
Click to expand...

In other words, just give the money to Putin, in effect? I think a lot of people might feel there's a quite a bit to that other than "bigging up ego".

And you still haven't answered which people in Russia exactly need assistance, and with what? You're aware the war is actually taking place in Ukraine?
 
frostbite said:
Russians are not victims in this war. Russians are the perpetrators, the invaders, the sole cause of this war.

All the money should go to Ukrainians. Confiscated if there is no other way.
Click to expand...
Such a narrow minded view, fecking hell. There are Russian citizens which did not agree with the thoughts and actions of Putin and will have lost close family members and friends. This is who this relief money from Abramovich is for.
 
justsomebloke said:
And I'm happy to oblige. What he says in the statement is actually " The foundation will be for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine."

Statement from Roman Abramovich | News | Official Site | Chelsea Football Club (chelseafc.com)
Click to expand...

I asked if there were any quotes saying only Ukrainians would benefit from his money. If you have those I'd be interested. I don't need to be linked the statement where he said "all victims of the war".

The precise wording in the statement makes it incredibly obvious, doesn't it?
 
pascell said:
Such a narrow minded view, fecking hell. There are Russian citizens which did not agree with the thoughts and actions of Putin and will have lost close family members and friends. This is who this relief money from Abramovich is for.
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ. Try thinking that scheme through in its various stages, with all its implications. See where it leads.
 
justsomebloke said:
In other words, just give the money to Putin, in effect? I think a lot of people might feel there's a quite a bit to that other than "bigging up ego".

And you still haven't answered which people in Russia exactly need assistance, and with what? You're aware the war is actually taking place in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
I am talking about Russian ethnic people in ukraine. Not occupied Russian forces. Money won't be given to Ukrainian president either. Why you keep insist on Putin. It's non-governmental humanitarian organisation will use this money for humanitarian purpose.

Ok let people suffer despite having billions in bank because of ego.
 
Of course there are ethnic Russians, Tatars, Jews, Poles, Nigerians etc in Ukraine. Sadly they're all victims of Russia's war and when people say "aid for Ukraine", it's also aid for those minorities.

Sure the families of Russian men who were killed while trying to occupy another country also need support, but I'm sure Vlad got their backs. Roman might have a few rubles left as well, if he wants to help them.
 
duffer said:
I asked if there were any quotes saying only Ukrainians would benefit from his money. If you have those I'd be interested. I don't need to be linked the statement where he said "all victims of the war".

The precise wording in the statement makes it incredibly obvious, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

You claimed RA said in his statement something he didn't in fact say. So obviously, you do need to be linked the statement where he said "all victims of the war", because that is not an identical statement to "victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine ".

The reason for this is, of course, that it is highly debatable whether there can be said to be any victims of that war on the Russian side. The only Russians present in the war zone are Russian troops, or personnel otherwise engaged in supporting the Russian war effort. It would be a highly original and unusual, not to say bizarre, understanding of the concept to regard these as "victims". They are the reason there are any victims. While the "all" adds an ambiguity to the statement that sceptics about RAs intentions could justifiably note, it would be ridiculous to understand this as a clear statement of intent that money would go to Russians as well as Ukrainians.

And everyone understands that if RA had been understood to mean that at the time, he would have faced a huge backlash. If you seriously imagine he gets off that hook because he was careful to word things ambiguously in his original press statement, good luck with that.
 
pascell said:
Such a narrow minded view, fecking hell. There are Russian citizens which did not agree with the thoughts and actions of Putin and will have lost close family members and friends.
Click to expand...
I worked in Serbia last Autumn and meet a good few of them. They're practically living on the run with their lives in total tatters.
 
justsomebloke said:
You claimed RA said in his statement something he didn't in fact say. So obviously, you do need to be linked the statement where he said "all victims of the war", because that is not an identical statement to "victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine ".

The reason for this is, of course, that it is highly debatable whether there can be said to be any victims of that war on the Russian side. The only Russians present in the war zone are Russian troops, or personnel otherwise engaged in supporting the Russian war effort. It would be a highly original and unusual, not to say bizarre, understanding of the concept to regard these as "victims". They are the reason there are any victims. While the "all" adds an ambiguity to the statement that sceptics about RAs intentions could justifiably note, it would be ridiculous to understand this as a clear statement of intent that money would go to Russians as well as Ukrainians.

And everyone understands that if RA had been understood to mean that at the time, he would have faced a huge backlash. If you seriously imagine he gets off that hook because he was careful to word things ambiguously in his original press statement, good luck with that.
Click to expand...

It was as obvious at the time as it is now. Many people commented on the way he’d said “all victims of the war”. I remember that because I commented on it myself. He was clearly hedging his bets to keep Russia onside.

It’s moot point though. The press release isn’t a legally binding document. Although it was an obvious clue that’s what is happening now would eventually happen.
 
Last edited:
justsomebloke said:
You claimed RA said in his statement something he didn't in fact say. So obviously, you do need to be linked the statement where he said "all victims of the war", because that is not an identical statement to "victims on both sides of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine ".
Click to expand...

I cut and pasted the quote directly from the article referred to in this thread. If you think they made that up, OK, not impossible I guess.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...-sign-2-3bn-Ukraine-receive-Chelsea-sale.html


The quote from the Daily Mail is different to the one from the Chelsea website but neither contradict each other and neither of them say "only Ukrainians will benefit", which is my only point.

As for there not being Russian victims of this war, that's another point (which I disagree with, there's thousands of Russian families who now have no dad, mum or whatever because of a war they had nothing to do with starting).
 
So, 3 clubs in the league now have strong ties with Gulf states and it could be easily 4 in a few months.
 
Least surprising news ever:

Leaked documents reveal a money trail linking oligarch Roman Abramovich to two men dubbed "wallets" of President Vladimir Putin.

The former Chelsea Football Club owner has been sanctioned by the UK and EU but has previously denied any financial relationship with the Russian leader.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.