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

It sounds like several bids have been submitted but they're all far under the £3b mark, which supports Bilbo's point that the club is overvalued at that price point.

I think supporters are somewhat blinded by the trophies and on-pitch performance when looking at Chelsea. People buying the club are going to care more about revenue, costs, assets, and obligations.

The stadium issue is massive, as it puts a cap on matchday revenue and also represents a huge investment that will have to be made eventually. Their commercial revenues are in the Arsenal/Spurs bracket, not the Liverpool bracket and certainly nowhere close to United. And some of their biggest commercial contracts are long term so no opportunity for growth (for instance, shirt sponsor is £60m per year which is competitive with other clubs but locked in at that rate until 2032). There are a lot of suboptimal financial issues with the club that just didn't really matter that much under Roman's ownership but will certainly matter to any new owner.

I think Chelsea is probably worth less than Arsenal or Tottenham to be honest.
 
TheReligion said:
So what’s the hold up? Not heard that in the mainstream media
Click to expand...

If you have paid attention to Chelsea transfers, nobody discusses transfers. Back when Lampard was the manager Buck was at a press conference and asked about the Timo Werner transfer, he chuckled and said he values his position at the club and we don't discuss transfers. It will be done quietly and methodically.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...id-roman-abramovich-not-yet-convinced-to-sell
 
Chelsea can't even sell tickets or merchandise :lol: Oh this feels very sweet.
 
JJ12 said:
I’m sure they are aware
Click to expand...

That I'm not sure of :lol:

It's one thing to freeze assets, it's another thing to prove (beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law) that they are tainted and are worthy of seizure.

The first is driven by public sentiment, which has nothing to do with the viability of a government case in court.
 
Madness, Bad Man Putin Syndrome.

I hear next week anyone that has visited Russia may be considered a Russian backer and have their assets taken off them. Sarcasm
 
adexkola said:
That I'm not sure of :lol:

It's one thing to freeze assets, it's another thing to prove (beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law) that they are tainted and are worthy of seizure.

The first is driven by public sentiment, which has nothing to do with the viability of a government case in court.
Click to expand...
You may be right but the government know full well they have to prove it in court - they obviously feel like they have a strong enough case.
 
Silly question but can they even pay wages after a while? Can Abramovic still sell?
 
Is Chelsea the only English sports club with a Russian owner?
 
Baxter said:
He can’t sell up then.
Click to expand...
he can. Just has to get special dispensation to complete the sale, he wont get any of the sale fee though. Price for our club has just tumbled, which is a double edged sword. roman doesnt get the fee he wanted, but it entices further wealthy people to now enter the fray
 
Zexstream said:
Yes, Seizing someone's assets because they are friends with someone the government doesn't like is always the basis for sound Government policies.
Click to expand...
To be fair Putin isnt just someone the government doesn't like.
 
If the government grant sale as long as the funds don't go to Roman, would that mean the funds need to be held by Chelsea in trust? They may come out of this well.

I imagine the protracted legal case will damage them in the interim though.
 
VP89 said:
To be fair Putin isnt just someone the government doesn't like.
Click to expand...
He makes it sound like the government is seizing Roman's assets because Boris had a little falling out with Putin.
 
Correct decision. Hopefully this will have a material affect
 
Get back into the hole you crawled out of chelsea football club!! tata!
 
Zexstream said:
Yes, Seizing someone's assets because they are friends with someone the government doesn't like is always the basis for sound Government policies.
Click to expand...
Can we not remove people who clearly support Putin and this war?!

It is quite obvious what this guy’s stance is here.

A war criminal massacring innocent civilians and threatening nuclear war is now just “someone the government doesn’t like”. Disgusting take.

Also “anti-anti-racist”? How is this allowed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.