Football stuff

DeVlaeminck

Presumably the govt is going to enable the sale of the club ? I don't see how it can run for long under the current restrictions.

It'll be interesting to see where this ends for them - how much of a lasting legacy the Abramovic money will leave.

kingstongraham

If Ambramovich isn't in a position to write off the loans, and the club has no way of ever repaying them, can it be described as a going concern?

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

If Ambramovich isn't in a position to write off the loans, and the club has no way of ever repaying them, can it be described as a going concern?

A brief look at the accounts reveals it doesn't have any debt, so presumably the loan is in a holding company somewhere.

rick_chasey

DeVlaeminck said:

Presumably the govt is going to enable the sale of the club ? I don't see how it can run for long under the current restrictions.

It'll be interesting to see where this ends for them - how much of a lasting legacy the Abramovic money will leave.

He can unfreeze it if he donates it rather than sells it.

Would be a nice test to see how much he really "loves" the club, or if he's comfortable taking it down as collateral.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

DeVlaeminck said:

Presumably the govt is going to enable the sale of the club ? I don't see how it can run for long under the current restrictions.

It'll be interesting to see where this ends for them - how much of a lasting legacy the Abramovic money will leave.

He can unfreeze it if he donates it rather than sells it.

Would be a nice test to see how much he really "loves" the club, or if he's comfortable taking it down as collateral.

It would require permission from the UK government. That may well be given, but it is not in his control.

rick_chasey

If Chelsea does end up falling over, it would be a good deterrent for future clubs looking to solicit dodgy money.


Or are we of the view that Chelsea is "too big to fail" ?

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

If Chelsea does end up falling over, it would be a good deterrent for future clubs looking to solicit dodgy money.


Or are we of the view that Chelsea is "too big to fail" ?

History shows that no club is too big to fail.

Stevo_666

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

Not sure you're really understanding this "no punishment without sacrifice"

You get in bed with oligarchs, you're collateral, unfortunately.

DeVlaeminck

I mean I see no reason why me and lots of other Derby supporters should be punished for Derby going into administration but it hasn't stopped it happening.

Well I say punished I've actually quite enjoyed this season but you get my point.

A glance at a Chelsea forum suggests they have a monthly wage bill of £28m and insufficient funds to cover that for 1 month. I'm not sure what if any income streams are still open. If because of whatever circumstances they go into administration I'd guess - and it is a guess - they'd be treated like any other club in administration.

The admin will look for the best deal for creditors, not sure what the Premier League rules are - Championship it's 15 point deduction and a transfer embargo until you exit administration which in some cases (Portsmouth) can be over 12 months.

rick_chasey

FWIW, it could be worse.

Here's Dynamo Kiev (or i guess Kyiv).

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

Not sure you're really understanding this "no punishment without sacrifice"

You get in bed with oligarchs, you're collateral, unfortunately.

Not sure you understand who we are trying to punish, even though I stated it clearly above.

So you reckon that people such the cleaning staff at Stamford Bridge have 'got into bed' with Abramovich and should suffer for it?

Dorset_Boy

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

Not sure you're really understanding this "no punishment without sacrifice"

You get in bed with oligarchs, you're collateral, unfortunately.

So everyone that has booked a TUI holiday should be shafted too, seeing as 30% of the company is owned by someone definitely known to be a lot closer to Putin than Abramovich? Why are TUI not being sanctioned in the same way that Chelsea FC are?

Also, you clearly have zero understanding of professional sports people and the contracts they sign in their short careers. And you also seem very pleased to see a bad situation made even worse and plenty of small people lose their jobs. ad don't come back with the cry me a river bit.

I think the Govenrment need to facilitate the sale, and quickly. The proceeds could surely be paid into an account placed in trust. No one to access those funds whilst sanctions persist, and during that period a process determined as to what happens to the funds if sanctions on Abramovich are lifted in the future.

Pross

DeVlaeminck said:

I mean I see no reason why me and lots of other Derby supporters should be punished for Derby going into administration but it hasn't stopped it happening.

Well I say punished I've actually quite enjoyed this season but you get my point.

A glance at a Chelsea forum suggests they have a monthly wage bill of £28m and insufficient funds to cover that for 1 month. I'm not sure what if any income streams are still open. If because of whatever circumstances they go into administration I'd guess - and it is a guess - they'd be treated like any other club in administration.

The admin will look for the best deal for creditors, not sure what the Premier League rules are - Championship it's 15 point deduction and a transfer embargo until you exit administration which in some cases (Portsmouth) can be over 12 months.

There was talk of the Premier League advancing them the next stage of their TV money to get them through to the end of the season. I assume that would be deemed acceptable as the money would go directly to running the club rather than to Abramovich.

I wonder where players stand in terms of their contracts if this goes beyond the end of the season (and I don't see how it won't).

In terms of points deduction, it is 9 points in the Premiership and, as in the Football League, can be added the following season if it occurs when a team is already safe or guaranteed to be relegated.

Dorset_Boy

The licence doesn't seem to allow any new contracts to be signed. So the 3 who are out of contract can't sign on again, if they wanted to.
It presumably also means no one can move from an academy contract to a senior contract.

seanoconn

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

No to punishing Club employees, cleaning staff and alike. Punishing Chelsea supporters? Meh, if needs must.

Pross

seanoconn said:

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

No to punishing Club employees, cleaning staff and alike. Punishing Chelsea supporters? Meh, if needs must.

As Rick keeps pointing out, they were happy to take the money from someone who was known to be a bit dodgy throughout and the success it brought.

DeVlaeminck

I mean nobody cares really - it happened at Wigan, it happened at Bury, it's happening at Derby - if it happens at Chelsea there'll be no sympathy.

Pross

Dorset_Boy said:

The licence doesn't seem to allow any new contracts to be signed. So the 3 who are out of contract can't sign on again, if they wanted to.
It presumably also means no one can move from an academy contract to a senior contract.

I was thinking more those who would still be under contract, would this situation be something that would allow them to break the contract and become free agents? I assume that if the club were no longer able to pay them it would nullify their contracts anyway.

DeVlaeminck

Yes on Radio 5 someone said there can be no player sales - there must be players getting their agents to check the legality of that.

The academy to pro contract thing will be a real issue though as it allows lads to walk for minimal compensation rather than a transfer fee - it's happened to us several times under our embargo with one lad now having played first team football for Liverpool. If you are under embargo for 12 months obviously you lose a whole year group from the academy.

surrey_commuter

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

victims of the Ukraine War could include Russian veterans

Stevo_666

surrey_commuter said:

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

victims of the Ukraine War could include Russian veterans

I'm sure we would also be able to stipulate who gets the money. However it's a bit hypothetical at present.

Stevo_666

Pross said:

seanoconn said:

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

No to punishing Club employees, cleaning staff and alike. Punishing Chelsea supporters? Meh, if needs must.

As Rick keeps pointing out, they were happy to take the money from someone who was known to be a bit dodgy throughout and the success it brought.

I think you'll find that most supporters gave money to someone who was a bit dodgy - by buying match tickets etc. Does that mean Chelsea supporters are due a refund?

Stevo_666

seanoconn said:

Stevo_666 said:

I would have thought the best way forward is to take Abramovich up on his offer to donate the net proceed to victims of the Ukraine war and ensure that any proceeds are paid to an account controlled by a party that can make sure this can happen.

I am all for punishing Abramovich, but see no reason to punish club employees, players or supporters. So best let the club carry on by selling it in that way.

No to punishing Club employees, cleaning staff and alike. Punishing Chelsea supporters? Meh, if needs must.

Yeah yeah

rick_chasey

We don't even know if Chelsea has been used to launder some of his stolen money, right?

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

We don't even know if Chelsea has been used to launder some of his stolen money, right?

I don't think we do. How does that relate to my point above about punishing staff?

rick_chasey

People lose their jobs for all sorts of reasons beyond their control.

The owner is incredibly, corrupt and a crook and is accessory to a bunch of murders and the last person who investigated him as laundering Putin's money was murdered by Russian state backed assassins.

The fault is on the management to sell it to him to begin with. Management makes bad decisions and people lose out. Plenty of clubs go bust for bad management.

skyblueamateur

rick_chasey said:

People lose their jobs for all sorts of reasons beyond their control.

The owner is incredibly, corrupt and a crook and is accessory to a bunch of murders and the last person who investigated him as laundering Putin's money was murdered by Russian state backed assassins.

The fault is on the management to sell it to him to begin with. Management makes bad decisions and people lose out. Plenty of clubs go bust for bad management.

Yep. Always the staff at the bottom who get shit on unfortunately.

rick_chasey

Remarkable how charitable people get when the firm in question does stuff they like.

Firm's go bust all the time.

No company should be too big to fail. Bad governance leads to bad outcomes. If you want to sell your club to a billionaire with a murky reputation and take their money, you make your bed and lie in it.

Chelsea should be made an example of to put off all other clubs doing the same.

The authorities can and should then go after all the other murky owners and do the same.

The whole debacle has corrupted football beyond measure. The club bares some responsibility for that, like it or not.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

People lose their jobs for all sorts of reasons beyond their control.

The owner is incredibly, corrupt and a crook and is accessory to a bunch of murders and the last person who investigated him as laundering Putin's money was murdered by Russian state backed assassins.

The fault is on the management to sell it to him to begin with. Management makes bad decisions and people lose out. Plenty of clubs go bust for bad management.

Management don't sell shares unless they own them.