Transfer Talk Topic

[Bert19]

5 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Probably being dense, what is SA?

(Just realised, Saudi Arabia).

I don't think we're recouping a penny. Best thing that can be said is that we were rich and stable enough for that to not be too much of a problem for his first year or two here.

To be fair to the new owners, they do at least seem to have secured loans that have involved us not paying his salary and apparently a permanent reduction in any potential salary he would have been paid here after last summer (and an agreed release clause for next year for approx his remaining book value).  So they've at least done their best to make the best of a very bad situation

But overall, you are correct.  It will be impressive if we manage to recoup any fees now and they deserve credit if they do get that transfer fee. 

Saudi I fear is our best hope. 

[McCreadie]

30 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Well, pound for pound, as a stand alone transfer, it has to be the worst by a mile.

In rough numbers, signed for 95m, and a contract worth roughly 100m, so a 195m outlay and he has played 44 games, and scored 15 goals for that money. 

What have we recouped thus far:

- Inter, loan fee and or wage contribution

- Roma, loan fee and or wage contribution

Maybe somewhere between 5m and 10m each ? Even 10m each, that means he has cost us 175m.

What will we recoup thereafter? Who knows. SA is our only hope.

Edit - according to various websites, we got a total of 15m in loan fees and his wages were covered. So revised calculation:

Transfer fee 95m. 20m paid in wages year 1, so 115m. 15m received in loan fees, so outlay now 100m, but with 2 years left of 20m a season. If we can give him away for nothing in the summer, he has cost 100m for a season's work. Worst case scenario, we can't shift him and he costs us another 40m 

You forget that we made a £20m profit on him the first time around, if you include the transfers in and out and the loan fees.

 

[paulw66]

3 minutes ago, McCreadie said:

You forget that we made a £20m profit on him the first time around, if you include the transfers in and out and the loan fees.

 

which is entirely separate from the decision to buy him back

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, Mark Kelly said:

BuT hE's A pRoVeN gOaL sCoRer.

20m per year for a player who helped the team make the top 4 and probably would have done so for the next 4 years which guarantees  cl football, TV revenue, Blue chip sponsors etc. and all the other riches Vs where the club is now and probably for the foreseeable future 

But hey the book is closed on him,  we all move on and hopefully season tickets will be easier to come by in the coming seasons 

[paulw66]

2 minutes ago, ROTG said:

20m per year for a player who helped the team make the top 4 and probably would have done so for the next 4 years which guarantees  cl football, TV revenue, Blue chip sponsors etc. and all the other riches Vs where the club is now and probably for the foreseeable future 

 

His 8 league goals were instrumental in that top 4 finish. Jackson currently has 7. 

2 minutes ago, ROTG said:

 

But hey the book is closed on him,

I wish it was, but someone keeps posting about it.............

2 minutes ago, ROTG said:

we all move on and hopefully season tickets will be easier to come by in the coming seasons 

wouldn't count on it. 

[McCreadie]

28 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

which is entirely separate from the decision to buy him back

It is. I’m not disputing that, or the fact it was a terrible decision to get him back. But just pointing out that his overall cost is slightly less than it would first appear. 

[ROTG]

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

His 8 league goals were instrumental in that top 4 finish. Jackson currently has 7. 

I am sure Jackson will score 121 goals in 281 Pl games.

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

I wish it was, but someone keeps posting about it.

All I posted  is the club have a proven goal scorer on the books, who been sent to Coventry.

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

wouldn't count on it.

Happy to take a punt with the winner give this web site the money on me getting a season ticket before any of the current first scoring 20 PL goals. Proven loaned players who scorer 20 goals are exempt.  

over to you

[paulw66]

3 minutes ago, ROTG said:

I am sure Jackson will score 121 goals in 281 Pl games.

All I posted  is the club have a proven goal scorer on the books, who been sent to Coventry.

Happy to take a punt with the winner give this web site the money on me getting a season ticket before any of the current first scoring 20 PL goals. Proven loaned players who scorer 20 goals are exempt.  

over to you

1. Maybe he will. He will certainly outscore Lukaku's season here.

2. Lukaku sent himself to Coventry

3. I don't understand the bet.  You getting a ST before what......???

Edited January 9 by paulw66

[ROTG]

50 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

1. Maybe he will. He will certainly outscore Lukaku's season here.

Can’t remember Lukaku scoring a hat trick against 9 men also Lukaku only played 1500 minutes for 8 goals in the PL season you are referencing. Jackson has scored 7 in 1475 minutes to date so I doubt it. 
 

 

58 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

 

2. Lukaku sent himself to Coventry

He didn’t last summer. Was sent to Coventry by TBSD or the Jellyfish or both. 
 

1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

3. I don't understand the bet.  You getting a ST before what......???

Quite simple, I will have a season ticket before any of the players in the current Chelsea squad score 20 PL goals in a season.  

[Blue Moon]

5 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Quite simple, I will have a season ticket before any of the players in the current Chelsea squad score 20 PL goals in a season.  

Cole says hi

[paulw66]

20 minutes ago, ROTG said:

 

Quite simple, I will have a season ticket before any of the players in the current Chelsea squad score 20 PL goals in a season.  

In a single season? Nope. 

Even Fat Rom only achieved that once in his career. And that was with taking penalties. Drogba only managed it twice. 

That's a poor bet, especially without knowing whether you are a member or not, and if so, how often you go.  also, any of the current lot could be sold in the summer, so I'd instantly lose, regardless. 

 I am also not sure what the correlation is between you getting a ST, and our players scoring goals.

[Dwmh]

8 hours ago, paulw66 said:

That's always been the case, BUT, there are subtle but important differences. 

Lukaku was 28, and given a 5 year deal on enormous money. By the time he'd thrown his toys, we then had to try and offload a 29 year old problem, on circa 20m a year (for 4 more years). 

The players now who have been given long contracts, are largely 21-23. If, after a year or two, they "do a Lukaku", then trying to find a club who might want to pay decent money for a 23-25 year old will be much easier than offloading a 29 year old with no resale value.  Especially, as from what I understand, none of these long contracts have wages anywhere near (not even half) of what Lukaku was / is getting. 

The decision to pay a 28 year old 20m a season for 5 years, is without doubt the worst transfer of the RA era (possible in PL history), and is far more ludicrous than giving a 22 year old a 7 year contract on 100k a week*

*appreciate there is some guesswork with the numbers, but they are illustrative 

So Lukaku can waltz off to Italy and get something close to his Chelsea wage at 28/29 depite not playing well.
But somehow we are safe with the likes of Fernandez because even if they perform well we can hold them to their contract.

Bizarre - everything about Lukaku's 5 year contract says we totally screwed up with the 7 year contracts.

[paulw66]

20 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

So Lukaku can waltz off to Italy and get something close to his Chelsea wage at 28/29 depite not playing well.
But somehow we are safe with the likes of Fernandez because even if they perform well we can hold them to their contract.

Bizarre - everything about Lukaku's 5 year contract says we totally screwed up with the 7 year contracts.

No, I meant if the long contract players do a Lukaku, and want out, we should be able to shift them, as they aren't on ludicrous weekly wages

[Dwmh]

1 minute ago, paulw66 said:

No, I meant if the long contract players do a Lukaku, and want out, we should be able to shift them, as they aren't on ludicrous weekly wages

Well those that look good.  We don't seem to be doing well shifting with Sarr who signed a 5 year contract.
But the real issue is not shifting players it is getting a fee for the good ones.  
Lukaku is a prime example of how a player capabable of getting a similar wage in Italy can do so without us getting a fee.  Why doesn't Enzo just waltz off to RM for triple the money (if/when he starts playing as well as he did last season again)

[ROTG]

7 hours ago, paulw66 said:

In a single season? Nope. 

Even Fat Rom only achieved that once in his career. And that was with taking penalties. Drogba only managed it twice. 

That's a poor bet, especially without knowing whether you are a member or not, and if so, how often you go.  also, any of the current lot could be sold in the summer, so I'd instantly lose, regardless. 

 I am also not sure what the correlation is between you getting a ST, and our players scoring goals.

IMO being a member of not will not have any relevance to getting a ST in the future.

 

the bet I guess we will put that on the back burner until the summer

As for Lukaku lets see the treatment given to him buy the club when he returns at the end of the season. 

 

[paulw66]

7 hours ago, ROTG said:

IMO being a member of not will not have any relevance to getting a ST in the future.

 

Then you know nothing about the system, and if you are not currently a member, I will take your bet. 

[ROTG]

21 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Then you know nothing about the system, and if you are not currently a member, I will take your bet. 

When did I say I was not a member.?

Point being IMO should the club go back to mid table mediocrity, then I doubt the current season ticket quota will be met by members taking up the ST offer. 
 

it’s wasn’t that long ago when 9,000 turned up to watch a midweek match at the bridge, even during RA time the bridge has not always been bursting at the seams. 

[paulw66]

9 minutes ago, ROTG said:

 

it’s wasn’t that long ago when 9,000 turned up to watch a midweek match at the bridge, even during RA time the bridge has not always been bursting at the seams. 

I would guess 30+ years.

You clearly don't go often, if at all. Even when we were awful last year ( and this) I have friends who are members who couldn't get hold of any tickets for love nor money (bar domestic cup ties)

I had one mate begging me almost weekly asking if I was using my two tickets, and if not, could he take them. I have another mate who bought a membership this year, and hasn't been able to use it once. There is a lot of noise amongst the Supporters group of members who have asked for their money back, as they can't get hold of any tickets, so its pointless having it. 

The success of the last 20+ years has lead to enormous growth of our fan base, both domestically and abroad far beyond what people realise. I will never relinquish my ST, as I'll never get it back.

 

Edit - I was pretty close. A lot has happened in those (nearly) 30 years.

Chelsea hosted Coventry City at Stamford Bridge on 4 May 1994 and only 8,923 fans witnessed the Sky Blues’ 2-1 away victory. 

Edited January 10 by paulw66

[ROTG]

22 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

I would guess 30+ years.

You clearly don't go often, if at all. Even when we were awful last year ( and this) I have friends who are members who couldn't get hold of any tickets for love nor money (bar domestic cup ties)

I had one mate begging me almost weekly asking if I was using my two tickets, and if not, could he take them. I have another mate who bought a membership this year, and hasn't been able to use it once. There is a lot of noise amongst the Supporters group of members who have asked for their money back, as they can't get hold of any tickets, so its pointless having it. 

The success of the last 20+ years has lead to enormous growth of our fan base, both domestically and abroad far beyond what people realise. I will never relinquish my ST, as I'll never get it back.

 

Edit - I was pretty close. A lot has happened in those (nearly) 30 years.

Chelsea hosted Coventry City at Stamford Bridge on 4 May 1994 and only 8,923 fans witnessed the Sky Blues’ 2-1 away victory.  

you are right I don’t go as often as one would like, due to my commitment to watch over the flocks in a lands far far away, as your mates said the membership is toilet myself and family are members and have had zero luck in getting any tickets this season when I been back in Blighty.  Unfortunately the weekly contribution from the flock whilst preaching do not cover the expense of spending on excess of £600 for 3 ticket from one of those ticket agencies which seem to have hundreds of ticket available for every home match.  

The other factor which also may have a bearing, is how much Chelsea decide to increase ticket prices next season. Clearlake need to recoup some of there outlay. 
 

Time to move on and you are welcome to the last word. 
 

oh yes I think you will find only 30k were turning for some matches during the successful years

[McCreadie]

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

Unfortunately the weekly contribution from the flock whilst preaching do not cover the expense of spending on excess of £600 for 3 ticket from one of those ticket agencies which seem to have hundreds of ticket available for every home match.  

I simply do not understand how or why this has not been sorted out. It is very simple to solve and eradicate the touts and legalised thieves once and for all. We have the technology. The club make nothing from the resale anyway. Why on Earth do they not just get this in hand and fix it. It's a disgrace and it is true for every club, football match and gig. It's 2024 ffs.

[paulw66]

48 minutes ago, McCreadie said:

I simply do not understand how or why this has not been sorted out. It is very simple to solve and eradicate the touts and legalised thieves once and for all. We have the technology. The club make nothing from the resale anyway. Why on Earth do they not just get this in hand and fix it. It's a disgrace and it is true for every club, football match and gig. It's 2024 ffs.

Yes. It should be very easy to solve. The club could start buying the odd ticket, then work out which member or ST holder it came from, and ban them. Word would get round pretty quickly and people would stop doing it. 

I guess, the clubs just dont care.

[east lower]

3 hours ago, ROTG said:

When did I say I was not a member.?

Point being IMO should the club go back to mid table mediocrity, then I doubt the current season ticket quota will be met by members taking up the ST offer. 
 

it’s wasn’t that long ago when 9,000 turned up to watch a midweek match at the bridge, even during RA time the bridge has not always been bursting at the seams. 

 

3 hours ago, paulw66 said:

I would guess 30+ years.

You clearly don't go often, if at all. Even when we were awful last year ( and this) I have friends who are members who couldn't get hold of any tickets for love nor money (bar domestic cup ties)

I had one mate begging me almost weekly asking if I was using my two tickets, and if not, could he take them. I have another mate who bought a membership this year, and hasn't been able to use it once. There is a lot of noise amongst the Supporters group of members who have asked for their money back, as they can't get hold of any tickets, so its pointless having it. 

The success of the last 20+ years has lead to enormous growth of our fan base, both domestically and abroad far beyond what people realise. I will never relinquish my ST, as I'll never get it back.

 

Edit - I was pretty close. A lot has happened in those (nearly) 30 years.

Chelsea hosted Coventry City at Stamford Bridge on 4 May 1994 and only 8,923 fans witnessed the Sky Blues’ 2-1 away victory. 

The home game on Saturday - A West London derby against our nearest and dearest rivals has just gone on General Sale.

If things keep going the way they are ST's won't be required by the looks of things (slightly tongue-in-cheek).

If nothing else, this should flag-up to the owners what a pigs-ear they and their appointed staff are making of operating this football club.

Edited January 10 by east lower

[Chelsea_Matt]

6 minutes ago, east lower said:

 

The home game on Saturday - A West London derby against our nearest and dearest rivals has just gone on General Sale.

If things keep going the way they are ST's won't be required by the looks of things (slightly tongue-in-cheek).

If nothing else, this should flag-up to the owners what a pigs-ear they and their appointed staff are making of operating this football club.

Look what they inherited and look where we are now.

Clown show.

[paulw66]

13 minutes ago, east lower said:

 

The home game on Saturday - A West London derby against our nearest and dearest rivals has just gone on General Sale.

 

In WestView only at GBP 180 per ticket. 

Edited January 10 by paulw66

[east lower]

1 minute ago, paulw66 said:

In WestView only at GBP 180 per ticket. 

That’s because the others went earlier today, but not withstanding that, it’s a London derby and they sell out and have done for years and now this hasn’t.

Whichever way it’s dressed up, unusual and worrying.