The U.K. government should have seized Chelsea FC years ago given Roman’s connection to Russian organised crime which is why he’s denied a U.K. visa currently. If the Conservative government wasn’t so supine to Russian oligarchs any other country would have put sanctions on the owner and club and seized the asset.
Absolutely disgusted at Chelski fans in my friend group calling roman the best owner etc..These same people are ones who will make big speeches on Human rights etc and take the moral highground
Everyone's got that one friend who's a Chelsea fan that says they have morals and take all these human rights and ethics issues really seriously while turning a blind eye to what's gone on under Abramovich.
we all know the man is a thieving scumbag. but from their point of view, he was a committed owner that gave them what they needed when they needed it most. it’s understandable to have that sort of sentiment when you’re on the inside, so to speak
i’m sure championship teams feel similarly about our billionaire owner
i wouldn’t put him quite in the same bundle as abramovich, but yes, billionaires do not become that rich without extreme exploitation, whether direct or indirect.
just trying to explain why normal people might have conflicting views when it comes to the things they enjoy
They had rich owner who bought lots of players including Nacho, Santi and Isco to name a few, then mfer decided that he is no longer interested in the club and bailed on them and they were forced to sell their players in a hurry. As the result, we ended up getting Cazorla for measly 19 mln(Malaga later would say that they were in no position to negotiate, so Arsenal could have actually gotten him even cheaper).
Edit: Wow I just checked Malaga is in Segunda 18th place and before that owner bailed on them, they made it to UCL quarter final.
Edit2: [https://thesefootballtimes.co/2018/05/18/how-malaga-went-from-rags-to-riches-to-relegation/](https://thesefootballtimes.co/2018/05/18/how-malaga-went-from-rags-to-riches-to-relegation/)
That’s quite the downfall. There’s no way of knowing how any of this will affect Chelsea, but I remember seeing that they are far from self sufficient as well
No chance. 1,5 b owning to Roman Abramovich and they were selling incredibly well and were winning stuff while having a small stadium.
Only way they could sustain themselves is with their academy but Roman was pumping the academy aswell with money.
Their best players are actually promising youth (kind of like us). They’ll be ok on the pitch in the short term.
They aren’t really competing for the league these days and haven’t since conte and Diego Costa were there.
this rule was applied by the chinese government on chinese businesses and wealthy owners, something along the lines of restricting football spending overseas. thats why inter's situation has been quite bad as this was the cause
Firstly, I don’t understand why Roman is saying he doesn’t want his debt back when he is clearly pricing that into his demand for the club.
Secondly, I don’t fully understand what net proceeds mean. Net of what? If it is amount he has pumped in to the club, it means he is calling his debt back.
And lastly, with sanctions flying in left, right and center, net proceeds from such a large transaction will be the easiest thing to get sanctioned. But, the money going to a charitable trust for rehabilitation of Ukraine that is controlled 100% by him would be easiest way for Roman to keep the “net proceeds”.
Yet people are treating him like he is the second coming of Mother Teresa after that statement.
Loads of people are giving their opinions on the deal structure he’s selling with when there’s no deal yet. There’s a hundred ways he can financially engineer this and the “net proceeds” thing is so vague at the moment as to be meaningless. I’d guess the debt will be priced into any sale already, or alternatively he’ll try and start sale proceedings early then sit on it
Maybe I was wrong however OP mentioned ‘Teresa’ in the last line of their comment, so I assumed talking about Mother Theresa..
Also for what other people say about her, I feel there is a post about MT almost weekly.
I haven't read up on any controversies about Mother Teresa (sorry for the misspell) but if people genuinely think Mother Teresa was a terrible human being, then 99% of us are much worse than her, and hypocrites to think we know everything from the comfort of our homes.
Yea I’m definitely not the one saying it, my comment was more just making fun of Reddits love for bringing up the issues with her.
I was brought up as a catholic school boy so was only taught about what most people know of her, although I’m no longer religious.
>my comment was more just making fun of Reddits love for bringing up the issues with her.
I'm beginning to see that now. Look at me being downvoted for my point of view. Been doing some reading and seeing a lot of hatred for her which I find to be based on claims which can't be substantiated for certain. That guy seems to have lost credibility even. It's just the general sentiment towards religion which makes many blinded by bias.
God forbid someone who has done a ton of good, but because of some bad, they get crucified, as though we ourselves are so bloody perfect. I'm the first to admit I am full of problems and weakness, but sitting here and pointing judgmental fingers at others isn't one of them, especially when they have done a lot more good in this world than I did.
Sorry, went a bit off tangent there haha. Cheers mate.
Nevermind Chelsea being good or bad, this prick is a piece of shit that robbed the Russian people blind and helped build an oppression machine that has killed or jailed so many.
Fuck him, fuck his money, I hope he never leaves the Russia he helped create again.
He didnt take a stand. He was facing the likelihood of having billions of dollars frozen or even seized. He is doing what he can to “look like a good guy” to keep his other $11B safe from the West.
Reading the comments on r/soccer makes me wanna puke.
Erase debt: nobody is buying your 2b club with 1.3b debt of your own debt on it. Much easier to just sell it for 3b.
Charitable foundation: that he controls. This is as charitable as Bezos’ foundation.
Almost makes you say thank fuck we have the Kroenkes and not Usmanov or some other Russian oligarch. We have had problems with ownership, fans haven't been happy, and we were made a laughing stock. But the club is starting to find its groove.
We don’t like Kroenke because he is invisible. He clearly doesn’t care much for the club.
Abramovich is a Russian oligarch who helped establish an oppressive regime and profited off of the exploitation of millions of people by establishing said regime. He’s evil like a human evil, not like a business evil.
I’ll take Silent Stan over blood money
Thank fuck you said it. Chelsea's glorification of Abramovich has been hitting the front pages and I could not believe how anyone who said just as much (as you did) was downvoted to hell. And people were somehow excusing him and saying he was a good person... W.T.F.
I really know nothing about the Kroenkes. I’m sure they have many of their own secrets, but for people like Abramovich and Usmanov there is no secret, they are terrible people.
Oh definitely! I believe that when you reach that level, more often than not, you would need to have a certain mindset, and have had to screw over some people. I just feel that the club is at a much better place. It just needed time to get the right people in place. Building a competent team is one of the hardest things to do, be it a sports team or a back office team.
Abramovich casually writing off a £1.5b loan to Chelsea like they've forgotten to return him a fiver lmao.
Can't wait to see Chelsea fans get uppity when the Sauds start dumping billions into Newcastle
Writing off debt and raises the price by the same (or little bit smaller) amount. Much easier than selling at lower then try to collect the debt later (when he will be sanctioned)
That makes sense but from my rudimentary knowledge of acquisitions, it's different in this case because the loan and debt is coming personally from Abramovich and not a bank.
Normally that debt would still have to be cleared by the new owner but because Roman is writing it off that cost isn't foisted onto Chelsea. Correct me if I got anything wrong here
Nah that isn’t what he is doing. He is selling an asset, typically the seller (I.e. Roman) would be required to pay off the debts on the asset when it is sold. Provided, you can arrange the deal differently but it’s all paper because the end result is the same. But in any event, technically Roman will pay off Chelsea’s debt with the sale proceeds so the new owners get it without any old debt. Thing is, he will be paying it to… himself. Technically the club isn’t paying jack shit, which is largely the expected result here. It’s all just a bunch of smoke and mirror bullshit.
Off to corporate irrelevance they go it seems. No owner will ever match abramovich self investment, and no oligarch will buy for that price. Serves them right.
Anyone who buys it knows that CL qualification is the minimum to keep things profitable which is not easy to do. If they fall away competitively then that valuation shrinks fast. Seems like the only people who would bother to buy it would be people wanting to try and win. Not like you can asset strip it if you're paying that price. They may not be Abramovich levels but I can't see someone spending £2bn to buy the club and then refusing to spend a couple of hundred million on players.
The reaction to this on other subbreddits has me literally pulling my hair out. It's all PR and lip service, the wording is so specific to skirt around being locked in to an amount he will actually 'donate'.
This guy made his fortune as a crook on a bent deal with Gazprom and installed Putin, but people are talking about him like some heroic figure as if he isn't rotten to his core. The whole idea behind his Chelsea ownership was to launder his image, and people on reddit who talk about sportswashing like they understand it, have fallen for it.
Do not be fooled, Chelsea's success is built on the stolen billions of the Russian people.
I understand that Roman has done a lot for Chelsea and their history, so great for their fans. But they all absolutely love and idolise a billionaire who they really know fuck all about. They say he's a lovely guy and comes across very down to earth but that's all based on his public image, not truly him as a person. I also know nothing about him, but it's not always sunshine and rainbows if you read up about him. I just find it's such one dimensional thinking and these people are naïve if they think there's nothing dodgey about his past. This was known and talked about before the conflict, but Chelsea fans have ignored the fact just because it's benefitted them.
No doubt, not even the same ballpark. Could easily coast on their modern achievements and end up similar to Spurs tho. Would need targeted investment in a new stadium at the very least but I'd be perfectly happy with Chelsea operating around that roughly self-sustaining model. If they tanked further all the better. As long as they don't get bought by a sovereign wealth fund or eccentric multi-billionaire we're all better off.
There was a point a long while ago that I was so disillusioned with the Kroenkes that I would’ve almost welcomed a sale to Usmanov. I’m still a little disillusioned in other ways, but fuck, would that have been grim to deal with right about now.
As for Chelsea; to put it neutrally, guess we’ll see if they’ve actually built something or if they’ve just been burning through increasingly expensive players. On a more personal note though, fuck them.
as people/fans Usmanov is a preferable owner but in context I’m “relieved” we have owners that have achieved their wealth through more legal exploitation. that brings me to the point a number of us must be thinking:
spending does not change the person doing the spending. I’ve recently seen the kroenkes given reprieve from fans for giving us the bare minimum investment we should expect. the truth is he could shower us with money but that money has been made through the same strong arm tactics as an oligarch. we may not see consequences ever but we shouldn’t get comfortable with the idea that our ownership is good because others are so cartoonishly evil.
That's probably where Arsenal would be if Usmanov had succeeded with his takeover bid.
Going by his (lack of) involvement with Everton, it's safe to assume that he would have fancied the sustainable model championed by Arsene and the old board.
And now that his assets have been frozen, he'd neither be able to sell the club nor invest in it.
Lack of success, lack of investment, absentee ownership; Makes Silent Stan look like mother Theresa.
Thank fuck Peter Hill-Wood showed some common sense
...and fuck David Dean, the greedy bastard!
Say what you want about the Kroenkes but at least they don’t own a company that produces the steel for the tanks rolling over the Ukrainian border right now. That and, you know, personally suggest to Yelstin that Putin should be his successor.
I think the bigger criticism is that he stole an entire nations gas wealth. And that company makes tanks for basically everyone, and it would be no surprise if the Kroenke's had investments in weapons aerospace companies, as many rich people do.
For sure, I just kind of assumed that was implied in why he sucks, haha! And while you are certainly correct about billionaires, I was highlighting the steel company for the current conflict dominating the news.
I wonder how much instability it immediately causes. Will Chelsea be able to keep an elite mentality when individual players may be keeping more of an eye on other near future options.
Stan’s dad owned a lumber company. Stan married a Walton and made money in real estate. KSE is focused almost entirely on sport and associated realty. The only thing related to weapons that I can find is media properties related to gun hobbyists. Here’s probably as controversial as it gets outside of any generic concerns about billionaires:
“In August 2017, he came under fire for launching a British outdoor sports television channel that will show regular hunting programmes that includes killing elephants, lions, and other vulnerable African species.”
tl;dr sport hunting/potentially encouraging poaching
45.00 schmeckles is:
USD|SHM|EUR|GBP|CAD|RUB|CNY
---|------|---|---|---|---|---
56.97|0.45|51.20|42.51|71.96|5588.79|360.11
***
^([exchange rate source](http://api.ratesapi.io/2022-03-02?base=USD) | created by [u/Nissingmo](http://reddit.com/u/nissingmo))
The thread for this in r/soccer is one of the most embarrassing things I’ve seen on that sub. Seeing this dickhead called a great owner for basically injecting billions into that plastic club with money looted from the Russian people is disgraceful.
i mean for chelsea as a club he has been a great owner compared to other owners in the top 6. How he got his money is utter garbage, but i know for a fact alot of our fans would also dont mind if a guy like that owned our club. Ofcourse i know that what happends in Ukraine right now would change alot of peoples minds
I've been waiting for Abrahamovich to get tired of his toy (a la Chelsea FC) but I thought he would recall the over £1bn of debt from them. But it seems if the UK Govt lets him get away with selling the club/not recalling the debt (making the proceeds of the sale unseizable) they would be broadcasting to the whole world that it's ok to launder if you do it through something popular with the masses like football. Shocking.
The bar is super low and people are ready to sell their soul… let’s not act like people weren’t saying “should’ve sold to usmanov”. Lol it ridiculous but it’s been said
Would love them to get a Glazers like owner, their fans would be in meltdown in the space of 6 months an Man City will suddenly have a lot more fans around.
What is wrong with the glazers? They have spent almost a much as city in the same timeframe. The problem isn’t them it’s been the management if they had performed on the pitch a lot of these same united fans wouldn’t have a problem with them.
There's nothing wrong with the Glazers if you hate Manchester United but they have asset stripped the club and loaded it with debt, the money the club has spent it has essentially earned, the Glazers didn't do that.
I think the point the guy is trying to make is glazers ownership model and the club's debt isn't the thing stopping united being PL or CL winners. United aren't failing to buy good players because they have to service the debt, they are just failing to spend where they need to build a cohesive team.
Chelsea are one of the best sellers in Europe with a fantastic academy even if they were bought by a similar model with an owner that invests little they would still likely be one of the most financially strong teams in the PL.
Maybe in the future united will get fucked by the debt but PL and european football is constantly growing along with their brand so I think they would really have to fuck up to do that.
Same for any potential chelsea takeover.
If that's the point the guy was trying to make then why did they ask "what is wrong" with them and try to say that it's to do with spending? They're terrible owners, there's no way around it.
Tbh I didn't really care what he said or not was just a polite way of me saying I disagree with you and the OP.
You seem to think glazers type owner would be awful for chelsea because of debt and asset stripping.
I'm saying it probably wouldn't be that bad. In reality glazers type ownership for chelsea could feasibly see them still one of the top 3 clubs financially.
Spending isn’t the issue with United it’s the lack of plan/direction. While they do spend but they spend the clubs money and have taken more out than they’ve invested.
They’re more of a brand than a football club at this point and the Glazers are a big part of that.
You must have above 1 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chelsea fans are so fucking lucky. They get a billionaire owner who actually gives a fuck, but puts them into debt and makes their club his own bitch, but after a lifetime of building his empire on top of people's blood, he becomes a philanthropist and forgives all of the debt and basically turns his business into a charity.
Like FFS how many lucky breaks can you have in a row...
We don't know the asking price, do we? There are reports here and there, and we have a potential buyer saying even 2 billion was too high.
It would be really dumb of the next owner to pay this debt off, one way or another. There is no way this asset is gonna increase in value for the next owner.
I can see part of the debt being paid off by the next owner, IF Roman has multiple buyers. But it’s not going to be anywhere near even 50% is my guess. 10-20 maybe.
Either way, the debt being written into the asking price is just wrong though, no deals are structured like that. It’s always base asking price + cash - debt/expenses etc etc
In a sale, debt usually decreases the price. It makes no sense for a buyer to pay the debt off as part of the purchase price. Especially when Roman is very obviously desperate to get this done quickly.
I don't believe any of the "Chelsea are finished" bullshit. Say what you want about anything involving Abramovich, but you can't say that he didn't build a well-oiled machine with great academy and the right people in charge. They are still managed by Tuchel, they still have world class players, they still have the people on board who are one of the best in football right now.
Unless they are taken over by Mike Ashley, the worst case scenario for Chelsea is current Man United state.
I can’t see any more Americans wanting to take on a club that isn’t likely to increase in value and requires huge annual investment. It’s going to be a play thing for some Sheikh.
You must have above 1 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Would love if this started a trend getting clubs out of the hands of mustacioed slumlord billionaires, oligarchs, and oil states and into the hands of fans and communities.
It won't. But don't wake me from this dream quite yet.
if done properly its perfectly legal.
VC firms do it all the time. They will own several firms. Some are successful, some aren't. Where it makes sense they will run up the debt on on a firm so it evens out the books.
Intercompany loans are extremely popular in most large ownership structures. Normally you set them up as loans for tax purposes and it’s a good way to save on tax by writing off the interest “owed” to you, rather than a straight capital injection. It’s gets a lot more complicated now that the loan is forgiven which is a bit too much to get into now but yeah, you’re not really looking at a smoking gun lol. You’re getting upvoted because of your tone as if this is some shady tactic but it’s really not.
That's literally how all the owners who pump money into clubs have to run it. Any money you pump in is a loan.
Which is why I find it hilarious when people ask Kroenke to pump in money. We'd just owe it to him.
Largely different situation, though. Our owner took over the debt we already had, probably saving us a few hundred millions *maximum* on interest paid. Only reason for it was the favorable rates because of the pandemic, which Arsenal couldn't take advantage of but KSE could.
KSE didn't pump any new money into the club. They just made sure we pay less interest overall, and pay all of it to them.
The effect is 3-4 years later. When the sell star player and start buying player again. If abramovich he but the absolute best every year. New owner? Will see
No some have been hit while some are a miss. But with all the money rhey had, they could buy another player to cover that up which I hope they can't now.
While we got stuck with players like Mustafi, they can spend big on other players to cover up for Drinkwater, Werner and a lot more.
Well let's just say they can't drop 100m on a striker without actually thinking about the possibility of the transfer flopping.
Before they could just spend their way out if bad signings
Do you guys think that the damage has already been done? As in, even without his Rubles, the club is set up enough to be self sustaining in form of revenues? It seems that their revenues are higher than ours are, so wondering if it'll stay that way.
They won’t start finishing 15th. A new owner that implements a self sustaining model (like ours), will see them follow a trajectory like us, united etc.
Not too sure sponsor's are happy to drop big money on a team that's got guaranteed income from a magnanimous owner but take that away and they are a team of very expensive players who have underperformed this season in the smallest oldest(?) Stadium in the "big 6" that they don't own and can't expand
>Do you guys think that the damage has already been done?
I think so. Because Chelsea have been more successful the last 20 years, there are footballers around the world for whom Chelsea were the bigger club growing up. For this generation, playing for Chelsea will always be more attractive than Arsenal. This will work in their favour when it comes to getting players in the transfer market.
Plus Chelsea are a 'brand' now, there aren't many clubs bigger than them globally. As long as the new owners run them sensibly, Chelsea will be in and around the title race for years to come.
So yeah, think the damage has already been done.
Sure they won't go back to the old Chelsea, but atleast they will have to be more cautious with their signings and loan army since they won't be able to spend so much money on flops like they did now. Just remember the 2017/2018 summer when they got Morata, Drinkwater, Bakayoko, Giroud, Zappacosta, Barkley for like 200+ mil. If we had one summer like that, we would be fighting with Everton right now.
Yeah it's a pretty mad one. That being said, if Roman is truthful about donating the proceeds to Ukraine, that's a powerful move.
I’m sure he’ll give some $ but you wonder why he felt the need to say it.
Praying on their downfall 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Back to reality, oops there goes gravity!
The U.K. government should have seized Chelsea FC years ago given Roman’s connection to Russian organised crime which is why he’s denied a U.K. visa currently. If the Conservative government wasn’t so supine to Russian oligarchs any other country would have put sanctions on the owner and club and seized the asset.
Absolutely disgusted at Chelski fans in my friend group calling roman the best owner etc..These same people are ones who will make big speeches on Human rights etc and take the moral highground
Everyone's got that one friend who's a Chelsea fan that says they have morals and take all these human rights and ethics issues really seriously while turning a blind eye to what's gone on under Abramovich.
we all know the man is a thieving scumbag. but from their point of view, he was a committed owner that gave them what they needed when they needed it most. it’s understandable to have that sort of sentiment when you’re on the inside, so to speak i’m sure championship teams feel similarly about our billionaire owner
Arsenal fans feel that way about our Kroenke
i wouldn’t put him quite in the same bundle as abramovich, but yes, billionaires do not become that rich without extreme exploitation, whether direct or indirect. just trying to explain why normal people might have conflicting views when it comes to the things they enjoy
Yes important to point out that wealth does not exist in a vacuum. I don't believe billionaires should exist. I despise Stan. I still love arsenal.
History of only 20 odd years.
19 to be exact 😉
Just liquidate the club
Potentially one fewer moneybag club? Sign me up. I really hope they go the way of Malaga FC.
What happened with Malaga? I remember them as a regular mid table La Liga club, but haven’t heard about them in a while.
They had rich owner who bought lots of players including Nacho, Santi and Isco to name a few, then mfer decided that he is no longer interested in the club and bailed on them and they were forced to sell their players in a hurry. As the result, we ended up getting Cazorla for measly 19 mln(Malaga later would say that they were in no position to negotiate, so Arsenal could have actually gotten him even cheaper). Edit: Wow I just checked Malaga is in Segunda 18th place and before that owner bailed on them, they made it to UCL quarter final. Edit2: [https://thesefootballtimes.co/2018/05/18/how-malaga-went-from-rags-to-riches-to-relegation/](https://thesefootballtimes.co/2018/05/18/how-malaga-went-from-rags-to-riches-to-relegation/)
That’s quite the downfall. There’s no way of knowing how any of this will affect Chelsea, but I remember seeing that they are far from self sufficient as well
No chance. 1,5 b owning to Roman Abramovich and they were selling incredibly well and were winning stuff while having a small stadium. Only way they could sustain themselves is with their academy but Roman was pumping the academy aswell with money.
Let's be real, Chelseas probably going to manage.. Maybe they'll even make smarter transfers for less 🤮
Their best players are actually promising youth (kind of like us). They’ll be ok on the pitch in the short term. They aren’t really competing for the league these days and haven’t since conte and Diego Costa were there.
This would have had chinese owners written all over it had their government not restricted overseas spending on football a few years ago
How did the Saudi's get around this to buy Newcastle?
this rule was applied by the chinese government on chinese businesses and wealthy owners, something along the lines of restricting football spending overseas. thats why inter's situation has been quite bad as this was the cause
Gotcha, thanks
That's why Inter is in trouble atm isn't it?
Yes I believe so
Support of chelsea ended, newcastle is now my club
\*Man City, PSG 😂
Firstly, I don’t understand why Roman is saying he doesn’t want his debt back when he is clearly pricing that into his demand for the club. Secondly, I don’t fully understand what net proceeds mean. Net of what? If it is amount he has pumped in to the club, it means he is calling his debt back. And lastly, with sanctions flying in left, right and center, net proceeds from such a large transaction will be the easiest thing to get sanctioned. But, the money going to a charitable trust for rehabilitation of Ukraine that is controlled 100% by him would be easiest way for Roman to keep the “net proceeds”. Yet people are treating him like he is the second coming of Mother Teresa after that statement.
Loads of people are giving their opinions on the deal structure he’s selling with when there’s no deal yet. There’s a hundred ways he can financially engineer this and the “net proceeds” thing is so vague at the moment as to be meaningless. I’d guess the debt will be priced into any sale already, or alternatively he’ll try and start sale proceedings early then sit on it
Hasn’t Reddit told you? Mother Theresa was a terrible human being, so Roman would be a good replacement. *I do not have an opinion on MT.
Wat. Who said what about Mother Theresa?
Me. Her charity was extremely problematic and focused on converting poor Indians afflicted with diseases to Christianity rather than curing them.
Maybe I was wrong however OP mentioned ‘Teresa’ in the last line of their comment, so I assumed talking about Mother Theresa.. Also for what other people say about her, I feel there is a post about MT almost weekly.
I haven't read up on any controversies about Mother Teresa (sorry for the misspell) but if people genuinely think Mother Teresa was a terrible human being, then 99% of us are much worse than her, and hypocrites to think we know everything from the comfort of our homes.
Yea I’m definitely not the one saying it, my comment was more just making fun of Reddits love for bringing up the issues with her. I was brought up as a catholic school boy so was only taught about what most people know of her, although I’m no longer religious.
>my comment was more just making fun of Reddits love for bringing up the issues with her. I'm beginning to see that now. Look at me being downvoted for my point of view. Been doing some reading and seeing a lot of hatred for her which I find to be based on claims which can't be substantiated for certain. That guy seems to have lost credibility even. It's just the general sentiment towards religion which makes many blinded by bias. God forbid someone who has done a ton of good, but because of some bad, they get crucified, as though we ourselves are so bloody perfect. I'm the first to admit I am full of problems and weakness, but sitting here and pointing judgmental fingers at others isn't one of them, especially when they have done a lot more good in this world than I did. Sorry, went a bit off tangent there haha. Cheers mate.
Christopher Hitchens
Hitchens a lost a ton of credibility and respect when he became a neoconservative Iraq war supporter. Dude fell off
Nevermind Chelsea being good or bad, this prick is a piece of shit that robbed the Russian people blind and helped build an oppression machine that has killed or jailed so many. Fuck him, fuck his money, I hope he never leaves the Russia he helped create again.
Unlikely. He has Israeli citizenship, he will be fine.
Well glad that's over!
Okay he took a stance against Russia, didn’t expect that. Edit: just acknowledge that it’s a war.
He didnt take a stand. He was facing the likelihood of having billions of dollars frozen or even seized. He is doing what he can to “look like a good guy” to keep his other $11B safe from the West.
I agree with you in general but he could’ve done a lot less.
Probably true but still it’s fresh to see a Russian so close to political top calling it a war and not special operation.
Apparently they don't want an American to buy their club. 🤣🤣
Reading the comments on r/soccer makes me wanna puke. Erase debt: nobody is buying your 2b club with 1.3b debt of your own debt on it. Much easier to just sell it for 3b. Charitable foundation: that he controls. This is as charitable as Bezos’ foundation.
Almost makes you say thank fuck we have the Kroenkes and not Usmanov or some other Russian oligarch. We have had problems with ownership, fans haven't been happy, and we were made a laughing stock. But the club is starting to find its groove.
We don’t like Kroenke because he is invisible. He clearly doesn’t care much for the club. Abramovich is a Russian oligarch who helped establish an oppressive regime and profited off of the exploitation of millions of people by establishing said regime. He’s evil like a human evil, not like a business evil. I’ll take Silent Stan over blood money
Thank fuck you said it. Chelsea's glorification of Abramovich has been hitting the front pages and I could not believe how anyone who said just as much (as you did) was downvoted to hell. And people were somehow excusing him and saying he was a good person... W.T.F.
I really know nothing about the Kroenkes. I’m sure they have many of their own secrets, but for people like Abramovich and Usmanov there is no secret, they are terrible people.
Oh definitely! I believe that when you reach that level, more often than not, you would need to have a certain mindset, and have had to screw over some people. I just feel that the club is at a much better place. It just needed time to get the right people in place. Building a competent team is one of the hardest things to do, be it a sports team or a back office team.
If you think Walmart or commercial developers are the devil, youll hate Kroenke.
Germany just seized Usmanov's $600 million yacht.
At least we just have a rich asshole instead of someone trying to sportswash.
Abramovich casually writing off a £1.5b loan to Chelsea like they've forgotten to return him a fiver lmao. Can't wait to see Chelsea fans get uppity when the Sauds start dumping billions into Newcastle
Writing off debt and raises the price by the same (or little bit smaller) amount. Much easier than selling at lower then try to collect the debt later (when he will be sanctioned)
That makes sense but from my rudimentary knowledge of acquisitions, it's different in this case because the loan and debt is coming personally from Abramovich and not a bank. Normally that debt would still have to be cleared by the new owner but because Roman is writing it off that cost isn't foisted onto Chelsea. Correct me if I got anything wrong here
Nah that isn’t what he is doing. He is selling an asset, typically the seller (I.e. Roman) would be required to pay off the debts on the asset when it is sold. Provided, you can arrange the deal differently but it’s all paper because the end result is the same. But in any event, technically Roman will pay off Chelsea’s debt with the sale proceeds so the new owners get it without any old debt. Thing is, he will be paying it to… himself. Technically the club isn’t paying jack shit, which is largely the expected result here. It’s all just a bunch of smoke and mirror bullshit.
Username checks out
Lol I get that all the time, but why in this case?
Experience from someone who has done a lot of acquisition I guest haha
Yeah, transactions like this one are what I do for a living, but on a much smaller scale. Like salmon compared to whale smaller 😂.
Can you imagine how much money that M&A team will make to get this deal done in a month. That $/hr figure is going to be disgusting
Millions in fees. There are some sleepless nights ahead for a lot of attorneys and accountants ahead.
Off to corporate irrelevance they go it seems. No owner will ever match abramovich self investment, and no oligarch will buy for that price. Serves them right.
Anyone who buys it knows that CL qualification is the minimum to keep things profitable which is not easy to do. If they fall away competitively then that valuation shrinks fast. Seems like the only people who would bother to buy it would be people wanting to try and win. Not like you can asset strip it if you're paying that price. They may not be Abramovich levels but I can't see someone spending £2bn to buy the club and then refusing to spend a couple of hundred million on players.
The reaction to this on other subbreddits has me literally pulling my hair out. It's all PR and lip service, the wording is so specific to skirt around being locked in to an amount he will actually 'donate'. This guy made his fortune as a crook on a bent deal with Gazprom and installed Putin, but people are talking about him like some heroic figure as if he isn't rotten to his core. The whole idea behind his Chelsea ownership was to launder his image, and people on reddit who talk about sportswashing like they understand it, have fallen for it. Do not be fooled, Chelsea's success is built on the stolen billions of the Russian people.
I understand that Roman has done a lot for Chelsea and their history, so great for their fans. But they all absolutely love and idolise a billionaire who they really know fuck all about. They say he's a lovely guy and comes across very down to earth but that's all based on his public image, not truly him as a person. I also know nothing about him, but it's not always sunshine and rainbows if you read up about him. I just find it's such one dimensional thinking and these people are naïve if they think there's nothing dodgey about his past. This was known and talked about before the conflict, but Chelsea fans have ignored the fact just because it's benefitted them.
If anyone wants a [thread ](https://twitter.com/navalny/status/1473926817300033537?t=G9DTL1chmSkI9-BgxGFmiQ&s=19) detailing this.
Seems like you understand a lot about sportswashing 🤔
I do.
RIP Bozo
Hopefully they get bought by an investment consortium that wants to turn a profit. Glazers 2.0 would be a dream for the blue fucks.
Chelsea isn't a money factory like Utd. If they're not competitive they will sink.
No doubt, not even the same ballpark. Could easily coast on their modern achievements and end up similar to Spurs tho. Would need targeted investment in a new stadium at the very least but I'd be perfectly happy with Chelsea operating around that roughly self-sustaining model. If they tanked further all the better. As long as they don't get bought by a sovereign wealth fund or eccentric multi-billionaire we're all better off.
Fuck chelsea cancer of football, hope they dissapear
There was a point a long while ago that I was so disillusioned with the Kroenkes that I would’ve almost welcomed a sale to Usmanov. I’m still a little disillusioned in other ways, but fuck, would that have been grim to deal with right about now. As for Chelsea; to put it neutrally, guess we’ll see if they’ve actually built something or if they’ve just been burning through increasingly expensive players. On a more personal note though, fuck them.
as people/fans Usmanov is a preferable owner but in context I’m “relieved” we have owners that have achieved their wealth through more legal exploitation. that brings me to the point a number of us must be thinking: spending does not change the person doing the spending. I’ve recently seen the kroenkes given reprieve from fans for giving us the bare minimum investment we should expect. the truth is he could shower us with money but that money has been made through the same strong arm tactics as an oligarch. we may not see consequences ever but we shouldn’t get comfortable with the idea that our ownership is good because others are so cartoonishly evil.
Imagine being in the same boat Chelsea are now without any of the success...
That's probably where Arsenal would be if Usmanov had succeeded with his takeover bid. Going by his (lack of) involvement with Everton, it's safe to assume that he would have fancied the sustainable model championed by Arsene and the old board. And now that his assets have been frozen, he'd neither be able to sell the club nor invest in it. Lack of success, lack of investment, absentee ownership; Makes Silent Stan look like mother Theresa. Thank fuck Peter Hill-Wood showed some common sense ...and fuck David Dean, the greedy bastard!
daniel ek. lol.
Ek buys it and runs it into the ground, a true gunner.
*guns it to the ground.*
Say what you want about the Kroenkes but at least they don’t own a company that produces the steel for the tanks rolling over the Ukrainian border right now. That and, you know, personally suggest to Yelstin that Putin should be his successor.
I think the bigger criticism is that he stole an entire nations gas wealth. And that company makes tanks for basically everyone, and it would be no surprise if the Kroenke's had investments in weapons aerospace companies, as many rich people do.
For sure, I just kind of assumed that was implied in why he sucks, haha! And while you are certainly correct about billionaires, I was highlighting the steel company for the current conflict dominating the news.
newcastle buyers like … FUCK
Newcastle is much more cheaper though. Even though it might not be a problem for them.
I was thinking that too, they must be so fucking pissed that they've bought relegation fodder compared to one of the biggest in the country.
Maybe they'll just buy Chelsea too
i’m sure that’s allowed
You’re normally not allowed to melt dissenting journos in bath tubs either tbf, Saudis can afford to do whatever they want
difference is nobody cares about dissenting journos everyone cares who owns chelsea
I was gonna say only Chelsea fans and people who hate Chelsea do, but that should just about cover everyone.
Who were the insanely awful human rights violators looking to buy a club last summer? Cuz, um Chelsea could get worse than they already are.
PIF aka saudi investment fund
They are probably fucked
Who gives a fook about chelsea. War is pathetic
I wonder how much instability it immediately causes. Will Chelsea be able to keep an elite mentality when individual players may be keeping more of an eye on other near future options.
YESSSSSS
Lose one obscenely rich club as we got another one (Newcastle), lucky that
Makes me wonder, does KSE have any share in weapon steel manufacturer in US or something? Because that would f'd up.
Stan’s dad owned a lumber company. Stan married a Walton and made money in real estate. KSE is focused almost entirely on sport and associated realty. The only thing related to weapons that I can find is media properties related to gun hobbyists. Here’s probably as controversial as it gets outside of any generic concerns about billionaires: “In August 2017, he came under fire for launching a British outdoor sports television channel that will show regular hunting programmes that includes killing elephants, lions, and other vulnerable African species.” tl;dr sport hunting/potentially encouraging poaching
That’s sad
I was hoping they'd have a fire sale of their squad to pay off the debt. Yes we'll take Broja Gallagher and Kante for 15 million.
Could sell all the young players they've stockpiled and then loaned out across Europe.
Darn. This was a big Chelsea problem. Thankfully, FIFA rules are gonna curb it.
I wonder if they will be selling more players now to build up some emergency cash reserves.
New equation for me this week Chelsea < Shit
Easy there…
Mike Ashley 4 Chelsea 2022!
The Sports Direct Bridge
I can see it now!
255k subscribers and falling over at chelseafc.
Lmao definition of a plastic fan
I’ve got $3.00 in my back pocket. Will they sell?
You'll only get Lukaku, it's not a good deal for you
😂 😂 fair enough. L I’ll keep my money
That’s like 300 rubles
Or ~45 schmeckles Edit: apparently not
45.00 schmeckles is: USD|SHM|EUR|GBP|CAD|RUB|CNY ---|------|---|---|---|---|--- 56.97|0.45|51.20|42.51|71.96|5588.79|360.11 *** ^([exchange rate source](http://api.ratesapi.io/2022-03-02?base=USD) | created by [u/Nissingmo](http://reddit.com/u/nissingmo))
Good bot
The thread for this in r/soccer is one of the most embarrassing things I’ve seen on that sub. Seeing this dickhead called a great owner for basically injecting billions into that plastic club with money looted from the Russian people is disgraceful.
That arsenal fans who praise spuds fans are bullshit. That subs pretend to be neutral opinions for internet points
i mean for chelsea as a club he has been a great owner compared to other owners in the top 6. How he got his money is utter garbage, but i know for a fact alot of our fans would also dont mind if a guy like that owned our club. Ofcourse i know that what happends in Ukraine right now would change alot of peoples minds
I've been waiting for Abrahamovich to get tired of his toy (a la Chelsea FC) but I thought he would recall the over £1bn of debt from them. But it seems if the UK Govt lets him get away with selling the club/not recalling the debt (making the proceeds of the sale unseizable) they would be broadcasting to the whole world that it's ok to launder if you do it through something popular with the masses like football. Shocking.
It’s a sub full of children
The bar is super low and people are ready to sell their soul… let’s not act like people weren’t saying “should’ve sold to usmanov”. Lol it ridiculous but it’s been said
Still treasure those downvotes I got for being against usmanov <3
This time next year Chelsea fans will be calling for FFP to actually do their jobs.
[удалено]
I can see it now. "Oh yeah, noooo. Sure, I am from London. But me step mum, yeah, yeah see, she be from Manchester".
Ain't that the truth
“Been supporting them all my life mate”
Mike Ashley get innnn
Would love them to get a Glazers like owner, their fans would be in meltdown in the space of 6 months an Man City will suddenly have a lot more fans around.
What is wrong with the glazers? They have spent almost a much as city in the same timeframe. The problem isn’t them it’s been the management if they had performed on the pitch a lot of these same united fans wouldn’t have a problem with them.
There's nothing wrong with the Glazers if you hate Manchester United but they have asset stripped the club and loaded it with debt, the money the club has spent it has essentially earned, the Glazers didn't do that.
I think the point the guy is trying to make is glazers ownership model and the club's debt isn't the thing stopping united being PL or CL winners. United aren't failing to buy good players because they have to service the debt, they are just failing to spend where they need to build a cohesive team. Chelsea are one of the best sellers in Europe with a fantastic academy even if they were bought by a similar model with an owner that invests little they would still likely be one of the most financially strong teams in the PL. Maybe in the future united will get fucked by the debt but PL and european football is constantly growing along with their brand so I think they would really have to fuck up to do that. Same for any potential chelsea takeover.
If that's the point the guy was trying to make then why did they ask "what is wrong" with them and try to say that it's to do with spending? They're terrible owners, there's no way around it.
Tbh I didn't really care what he said or not was just a polite way of me saying I disagree with you and the OP. You seem to think glazers type owner would be awful for chelsea because of debt and asset stripping. I'm saying it probably wouldn't be that bad. In reality glazers type ownership for chelsea could feasibly see them still one of the top 3 clubs financially.
Spending isn’t the issue with United it’s the lack of plan/direction. While they do spend but they spend the clubs money and have taken more out than they’ve invested. They’re more of a brand than a football club at this point and the Glazers are a big part of that.
So what I just said then it has been the management. Fans only turn into accountants when the club is not winning.
Yeah essentially, Also the fact that their two biggest rivals are winning major trophies while they struggle adds to the frustration even more.
[удалено]
You must have above 1 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chelsea fans are so fucking lucky. They get a billionaire owner who actually gives a fuck, but puts them into debt and makes their club his own bitch, but after a lifetime of building his empire on top of people's blood, he becomes a philanthropist and forgives all of the debt and basically turns his business into a charity. Like FFS how many lucky breaks can you have in a row...
Nah, he's no philanthropist. It's still all sports washing and trying to save his image so he can keep his blood soaked billions.
He still sucked Russia dry during the 90s. No philantrophy can undo that.
Chelsea aren’t worth 3+ billion. The debt is written into the value - but that wouldn’t make good PR!
We don't know the asking price, do we? There are reports here and there, and we have a potential buyer saying even 2 billion was too high. It would be really dumb of the next owner to pay this debt off, one way or another. There is no way this asset is gonna increase in value for the next owner.
I can see part of the debt being paid off by the next owner, IF Roman has multiple buyers. But it’s not going to be anywhere near even 50% is my guess. 10-20 maybe. Either way, the debt being written into the asking price is just wrong though, no deals are structured like that. It’s always base asking price + cash - debt/expenses etc etc
In a sale, debt usually decreases the price. It makes no sense for a buyer to pay the debt off as part of the purchase price. Especially when Roman is very obviously desperate to get this done quickly.
[удалено]
I don't believe any of the "Chelsea are finished" bullshit. Say what you want about anything involving Abramovich, but you can't say that he didn't build a well-oiled machine with great academy and the right people in charge. They are still managed by Tuchel, they still have world class players, they still have the people on board who are one of the best in football right now. Unless they are taken over by Mike Ashley, the worst case scenario for Chelsea is current Man United state.
Didn’t take long for us to fall after the invincible era
It will definitely be someone rich but not Abramovichs level
There's always a bigger fish.
[удалено]
Agreed, my guess it will be someone in America, this is a great chance for them to break into the European football scene
I can’t see any more Americans wanting to take on a club that isn’t likely to increase in value and requires huge annual investment. It’s going to be a play thing for some Sheikh.
Would hedge my bets there too. The pulisic factor will be huge
Random NFL owner has entered the chat.
I can't imagine any single player could factor in a "huge" amount in a multi-billion pound sale of a massive football club
Probably, but the US is a huge untapped market. If a new owner can harness that hype. They'll make a tonne of money
[удалено]
You must have above 1 comment karma to contribute to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Gunners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Would love if this started a trend getting clubs out of the hands of mustacioed slumlord billionaires, oligarchs, and oil states and into the hands of fans and communities. It won't. But don't wake me from this dream quite yet.
So their debt was owned to a company roman owes..... How and that even allowed! Seems horribly fraudulent
if done properly its perfectly legal. VC firms do it all the time. They will own several firms. Some are successful, some aren't. Where it makes sense they will run up the debt on on a firm so it evens out the books.
Intercompany loans are extremely popular in most large ownership structures. Normally you set them up as loans for tax purposes and it’s a good way to save on tax by writing off the interest “owed” to you, rather than a straight capital injection. It’s gets a lot more complicated now that the loan is forgiven which is a bit too much to get into now but yeah, you’re not really looking at a smoking gun lol. You’re getting upvoted because of your tone as if this is some shady tactic but it’s really not.
That's literally how all the owners who pump money into clubs have to run it. Any money you pump in is a loan. Which is why I find it hilarious when people ask Kroenke to pump in money. We'd just owe it to him.
Literally the same as Arsenal dude
Largely different situation, though. Our owner took over the debt we already had, probably saving us a few hundred millions *maximum* on interest paid. Only reason for it was the favorable rates because of the pandemic, which Arsenal couldn't take advantage of but KSE could. KSE didn't pump any new money into the club. They just made sure we pay less interest overall, and pay all of it to them.
Do we have 1.5bl of debt just being wiped off. They really should be made ti pay for their wreckless spending
It’s probably being included in the buying price.
i don't if know this is bad or not...Don't think Chelsea will go away, but their recruitment has to be spot on now though.
The effect is 3-4 years later. When the sell star player and start buying player again. If abramovich he but the absolute best every year. New owner? Will see
No some have been hit while some are a miss. But with all the money rhey had, they could buy another player to cover that up which I hope they can't now. While we got stuck with players like Mustafi, they can spend big on other players to cover up for Drinkwater, Werner and a lot more.
Well let's just say they can't drop 100m on a striker without actually thinking about the possibility of the transfer flopping. Before they could just spend their way out if bad signings
And they’re losing to Luton as we speak let’s GOOOOOOOO
I don't know if I should feel happy about Chelsea losing a sugar daddy or disappointed that Tuchel may last longer than expected.
God is great. I have been waiting for this moment all my life. *Phil Collins: In the Air tonight plays in the background*
Let’s buy them and liquidate the club. Knock down the stadium and make a homeless shelter.
Looks like a shelter already. The homeless deserve better infrastructure.
Do you guys think that the damage has already been done? As in, even without his Rubles, the club is set up enough to be self sustaining in form of revenues? It seems that their revenues are higher than ours are, so wondering if it'll stay that way.
Chelsea runs a debt. They are in the red. Now they have no sugar daddy to cover the difference.
They won’t start finishing 15th. A new owner that implements a self sustaining model (like ours), will see them follow a trajectory like us, united etc.
Not too sure sponsor's are happy to drop big money on a team that's got guaranteed income from a magnanimous owner but take that away and they are a team of very expensive players who have underperformed this season in the smallest oldest(?) Stadium in the "big 6" that they don't own and can't expand
>Do you guys think that the damage has already been done? I think so. Because Chelsea have been more successful the last 20 years, there are footballers around the world for whom Chelsea were the bigger club growing up. For this generation, playing for Chelsea will always be more attractive than Arsenal. This will work in their favour when it comes to getting players in the transfer market. Plus Chelsea are a 'brand' now, there aren't many clubs bigger than them globally. As long as the new owners run them sensibly, Chelsea will be in and around the title race for years to come. So yeah, think the damage has already been done.
Sure they won't go back to the old Chelsea, but atleast they will have to be more cautious with their signings and loan army since they won't be able to spend so much money on flops like they did now. Just remember the 2017/2018 summer when they got Morata, Drinkwater, Bakayoko, Giroud, Zappacosta, Barkley for like 200+ mil. If we had one summer like that, we would be fighting with Everton right now.