His plane landed in Moscow.
Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN
- Thread starter Ali Dia
- Start date
Yet again another post without any explanation as to why the anger towards Roman, sorry I know your trying to hint at something but Indon’t understand your reference. I hadn’t heard anything negative about him prior to the Ukraine war, which is why I am asking for someone to explain.
Mushin Bayrak, a Turkish billionaire worth 11B is trying to buy the club. No consortium.
If he sells for 3bn it is a fine investment. The broad stock market would have returned much better with less risk and effort. But the important thing is he rode the wave of unprecedented growth in TV money. That won't happen again to the same scale. Buying a football club and pumping money in is not a smart investment
Most Billionaires don't have the money in cash and if they do, it is in Dollars.
Its over for Roman. He is purely hunted down by media and some who hide behind parliamentary privilege to talk things about him in wrong way.
No one can't talk about him badly in open because they knew they will be sued because no evidence point him to be close to Putin.
And again only evil mind in the world did as much in charity and leaving money from selling his assets for war victims. After all,his mother is an Ukrainian and his associate and co owner of holding company is also born Ukrainian Canadian. Shevchenko one of his buddies also Ukrainian.
Very much confused I am. No logic,no evidence,no trial and western world called this as barbarism and preached law is ultimate. Hypocrisy at its best.
Its over for Roman. He is purely hunted down by media and some who hide behind parliamentary privilege to talk things about him in wrong way.
No one can't talk about him badly in open because they knew they will be sued because no evidence point him to be close to Putin.
And again only evil mind in the world did as much in charity and leaving money from selling his assets for war victims. After all,his mother is an Ukrainian and his associate and co owner of holding company is also born Ukrainian Canadian. Shevchenko one of his buddies also Ukrainian.
Very much confused I am. No logic,no evidence,no trial and western world called this as barbarism and preached law is ultimate. Hypocrisy at its best.
Roman was one of the oligarchs that basically stole much of Russia's wealth in corrupt business practices after the fall of the Soviet Union. After Putin came to power that wealth came at a great cost as from that point on they were his puppets. If they decided to go against him they'd end up in prison or dead. They had to play his game, like it or not. Abramovich has always been on the run and all you're seeing here is that murky past catching up with him.
He's a very savvy guy and no doubt will land on his feet i.e. fecking rich. He's not really someone to feel sorry for.
My first thoughts looking at that tweet as well.
I am not feel sorry for him.Even tomorrow if he is dead he did all his wishes already most only can dream of.
The murky past or not if he is guilty I wish he should be tried for his crimes. Today him tomorrow any one.
You can't try someone for their crimes which were committed in another country whose government are protecting him. He's probably not the worst baddie in the world but he definitely isn't a goodie and is for sure undeserving of such extreme wealth.
He shouldn't be allowed into the country in first place. Then allowed to buy properties. Allowed to buy football club. Then getting help from his bloody hand when pandemic exploded.
Then suddenly became a criminal in flash. Oh wait what crime he did yesterday. Why this sudden outburst?There is no logic.
Only oligarch didn't face any sanctions is him.Who is protecting him. West or Russia now.
Not really in flash. He hasn't been allowed to live in this country since 2018. He's been globetrotting collecting citizenships since then. You are right that corrupt systems in London have enabled him though.
A guy that chopped up a reporter just bought an EPL club. Owning a club in England happens with no need for innocence. It would suck to be found not meeting the ownership criteria after a known murderer passes it.
If you truly reflect on some of the characters who have held ownership of PL clubs then you can’t but scratch your heads.
From the current and previous owners at City, the two who were drummed out at Liverpool, the Icelandic chap at WestHam, the bloke at Southampton Rupert someone or the other, Learner and the Chinese chap at Villa, Ashley ( to be fair he tried to balance the books) and now the Saudis at Newcastle add to that the Glazers and of course let’s add for balance Bates and RA at Chelsea.
And those names just popped out of my head before I even start to talk about the Likes of Blackburn, Swansea, Bolton
No, you are not
in a squad of 26 players only 7 are 23 or under, with 0 being teenagers, you have a couple of 25 year olds, only 2 of which actually play and the rest are 27 and above.Know that different people have different interpretations on this sale.
Obviously no one really knows how it's going to pan out in the long term, and given that we all have our biases, its difficult to argue and agree on here.
That being said, a lot on here have commented that given the limited size of the stadium, we'd struggle to compete from now on.
Fair point., but I am not sure this is as bad as it is made out to be and tbh., as far as this sale is concerned this might even be a Blessing in disguise.
The fact that our stadium is limited and we are yet going with a 3B price tag effectively ....
guarantees that we are warding off owners like Glazers.,
It also means that the only way new owners make money off us is to continue to challenge and keep winning. Only if we win, can we continue increasing our global fan base which will translate to increase in sponsorship revenues where our real revenue streams are.
Unlike in other clubs like united and arsenal, new owners cannot rely on match day revenues as much with Chelsea. Viz., Chelsea earns 30M less and 50M less respectively when compared to Arse and United in match day revenues. But we do considerably better than Arse in sponsorship and marketing revenues etc., because of on field success.
Doing an Arsenal to get into top 4 spot (where the CL money is) only really works if its temporary and the club is expanding its match day revenues at the same time.
Following this approach at Chelsea doesn't necessarily work as the drop in ambition might end up hurting the brand and growth in global fan base, reducing sponsorship revenues.
Obviously, this doesn't necessarily mean that new owners will go for big money sprees like Roman 2004. Totally agree on this point. But big money sprees aren't really needed for us to keep competing. In fact if you look at our first team, almost all established first team players were smart purchases or from the academy. Except perhaps Havertz who was big money but was young and highly rated.
Werner, Lukaku, Kepa were all failures. Mendy at the same time was cheap and smart.
Doesn't mean this is always the case., but spending for the sake of spending doesn't help at all.
Management and Organization structure is clearly more important that big money sprees for success.
I'd reckon We will go the Liverpool - Klopp route and commit to a really good manager in the long term and be efficient with our purchases., Hopefully this is Tuchel.
Again, the major difference b/w chelsea fans and let's say United fans is., for us, the most important thing is not success for the sake of it., but success to ensure the club's long term survival as a top top club and it's a necessity that we keep competing to ensure that.
United may have had a slumpy decade, but united is too big to fail and you are really only missing a good manager and club structure to come back.
But for Chelsea fans, if I can generalize a little here, our priority is to ensure that any new owner supports the club enough to keep competing at the top with efficient purchases and a really good manager.
And given the price tag and stadium limitation, the new owners may not really have a choice on this matter as this is the only way this buy could prove profitable for them.
Obviously no one really knows how it's going to pan out in the long term, and given that we all have our biases, its difficult to argue and agree on here.
That being said, a lot on here have commented that given the limited size of the stadium, we'd struggle to compete from now on.
Fair point., but I am not sure this is as bad as it is made out to be and tbh., as far as this sale is concerned this might even be a Blessing in disguise.
The fact that our stadium is limited and we are yet going with a 3B price tag effectively ....
guarantees that we are warding off owners like Glazers.,
It also means that the only way new owners make money off us is to continue to challenge and keep winning. Only if we win, can we continue increasing our global fan base which will translate to increase in sponsorship revenues where our real revenue streams are.
Unlike in other clubs like united and arsenal, new owners cannot rely on match day revenues as much with Chelsea. Viz., Chelsea earns 30M less and 50M less respectively when compared to Arse and United in match day revenues. But we do considerably better than Arse in sponsorship and marketing revenues etc., because of on field success.
Doing an Arsenal to get into top 4 spot (where the CL money is) only really works if its temporary and the club is expanding its match day revenues at the same time.
Following this approach at Chelsea doesn't necessarily work as the drop in ambition might end up hurting the brand and growth in global fan base, reducing sponsorship revenues.
Obviously, this doesn't necessarily mean that new owners will go for big money sprees like Roman 2004. Totally agree on this point. But big money sprees aren't really needed for us to keep competing. In fact if you look at our first team, almost all established first team players were smart purchases or from the academy. Except perhaps Havertz who was big money but was young and highly rated.
Werner, Lukaku, Kepa were all failures. Mendy at the same time was cheap and smart.
Doesn't mean this is always the case., but spending for the sake of spending doesn't help at all.
Management and Organization structure is clearly more important that big money sprees for success.
I'd reckon We will go the Liverpool - Klopp route and commit to a really good manager in the long term and be efficient with our purchases., Hopefully this is Tuchel.
Again, the major difference b/w chelsea fans and let's say United fans is., for us, the most important thing is not success for the sake of it., but success to ensure the club's long term survival as a top top club and it's a necessity that we keep competing to ensure that.
United may have had a slumpy decade, but united is too big to fail and you are really only missing a good manager and club structure to come back.
But for Chelsea fans, if I can generalize a little here, our priority is to ensure that any new owner supports the club enough to keep competing at the top with efficient purchases and a really good manager.
And given the price tag and stadium limitation, the new owners may not really have a choice on this matter as this is the only way this buy could prove profitable for them.
Is that not come into very young team category. We will include some superb youngsters such as Gallagher,broja,colwill,vale into squad for next season.No, you are not
27 calling it as peak for footballer. We can keep competitiveness two three seasons without much investment in the playing staff. So it's not that bad squad wise.
Last edited:
Usually owning a football is a way to lose money rather than earning it. It's an ego trip at best for many but for some it's something a bit more sinister. I don't think it's going to attract a good type of person in general. If Mike Ashley is the high water mark then that says it all.
No, I wouldn't say so. You have the 13th oldest squad in the league, average age of 26.9. Arsenal is a good example of a young squad, their average age is 24.2. There's also no evidence any of those players will end up in your squad next season, Gallagher might but seems more likely you'll sell Broja and Colwill and Vale are both teenagers, judging by your track record they'll both go on loan.
The chap at Brighton seems decent but after him and good ole Delia at Norwich I start to struggle as to who I would call model owners
I think the loan army will be greatly changed if a new owner comes in. A new owner might also see these young players as a better option than paying top money for what they believe is the best player possible. If anything, Lukaku should scare any owner from that route.
I suppose we'll have to wait and see, you'd expect Tuchel to keep his job so I suppose if he's been integrating younger players well then I could that continuing even with an ownership change. If Lukaku doesn't scare them then they should have a look at some of the players United have spunked massive money on, funnily enough one of them also being Lukaku
Our track record is not going to be used anymore without Roman. Tuchel will be the key alongside Cech and marina.
Tuchel love to play youngsters who are ready unlike Jose or Conte. Chalobah,cho,mount,James all are established as regular starters under him. With them winning cl too.
If next management have any clue then just stick with this current management team.
Isn't Marina off? Thought I saw that earlier in the thread. Chalobah and Hudson-Odoi have both spent half the season on the bench, they're established squad players moreso than starters.
To be fair that's somewhat distorted by Thiago Silva! Also Azpilicueta and Alonso have gotten far more minutes than anticipated due to injury. That said, I agree - we're not an incredibly young team by most standards but I do think we have struck the right balance between youth and experience.
That was confirmed to be fake - recent reports from our Tier 1 journos are she is still weighing her options and hasn't decided yet. Also Tuchel mentioned in his press conference today that she's ill and that's contributed to her lack of a public statement.
I think the post was fake but I have no doubt she’ll go given her relationship with Roman. The new owners will also want to bring in their own structure/trusted people.
Isn't "13th oldest" otherwise expressed as "7th youngest" or thereabouts? Seems reasonable to call it "fairly young" to me even ignoring some of the young players they are likely to try to incorporate next year.
I was going to say earlier that we might wanna investigate that Turkish bloke's connection to Erdogan ahead of time before making any moves this time
No, I rate your effort but you knew exactly what I meant. You are the 7th oldest from 20th oldest which makes you the 13TH oldest. AKA 20th is here <—— and you are 7 places from “here”!
Last edited:
He's 28 until he becomes 29!!
It's amazing how the worst people always have a look. They never look normal. They always have a look about them. Look at some of the worst politicians, businessmen, they always have a really off look.
Michael Rubin in the running too. Not sure of his worth but his company is worth 27bn
Im even more convinced Roman isnt getting sanctioned
I have no idea what this means but...muy bien. I hope Chelsea are older than something and everyone is happy.
Statistics at face value are meaningless. Thiago will stay for one more season. Azpillicueta might leave.Alonso is over 30. Kante and Jorginho are still 2 of the best in the league. Alonso is back up.
The age could rapidly fall overnight ,so trying to make sense of a useless star is a waste of time. Now if the squad was 32 then it might have context.
The sign in the window now says.
"For sale - Western Europeans and Americans only'
"For sale - Western Europeans and Americans only'