Chelsea owners and board

[chara]

Tiring day and home but during the hassle I finally had such a frightening realisation.

It looks as if the real reason for the Todd and co takeover was just to find an additional trading area to make money...no importance regarding game performance or the Roman quest for top success in the game.

Thanks to the posters highlighting various issues over the past few days I can finally see a motive and reason behind most of what has occurred since HMG decided to destroy as best they could our Club.

The enforced change seems now to be an attack from a different angle with the hope that Chelsea just become a statistic.

Or am I just tired and paranoid?

[xceleryx]

5 hours ago, chiswickblue said:

Also, these players are not seen as pure-profit because they are home grown, they are seen as pure-profit as there was no transfer fee so no amortisarion to write off when they leave.

If we sell Deivid Washington in a couple of years for 40 million, he won't be seen as pure profit as we paid a transfer fee for him. The accounting profit is the transfer fee received minus the remaining book value. Something like 10 million this summer counts as profit on Kepa (no chance of that happening).

Malang Sarr would also count as pure profit if we could somehow convince someone to pay a transfer fee for him.

True, although as I've expressed previously we're still going to be able to turn a profit on some of these younger players we've purchased providing we're getting them in at a relatively decent fee and wages. Players like DDF, Casadei, etc were all snapped up at fairly affordable prices for this day and age. If we were to sell them over the next couple of years there's a pretty solid likelihood we'll still generate profits from them. 

With the way football is these days player values can skyrocket after a few good months of football, even if that's at a Championship level for example. Plus there's just the general manner in which football inflation raises player value through moves to bigger clubs. 

If we're then able to loan some of these guys out and have some of the cost offset through loan fees and wage contributions that'll only further reduced their cost to us. 

We're going to continue to snap up young players when we can, the key will be of course to make sure we're not paying out the ass to do so. As long as they're affordable we'll stand a decent chance of making a return if they don't end up developing and holding a first team role here. 

[Max Fowler]

1 hour ago, chara said:

Tiring day and home but during the hassle I finally had such a frightening realisation.

It looks as if the real reason for the Todd and co takeover was just to find an additional trading area to make money...no importance regarding game performance or the Roman quest for top success in the game.

Thanks to the posters highlighting various issues over the past few days I can finally see a motive and reason behind most of what has occurred since HMG decided to destroy as best they could our Club.

The enforced change seems now to be an attack from a different angle with the hope that Chelsea just become a statistic.

Or am I just tired and paranoid?

Again Chara - Chelsea is an incredible investment opportunity for them.

Heard a good point yesterday - "Chelsea fans aren't willing to be patient and trust the process." Actually I and many I believe would 100% be patient and behind a longer-term project prioritising youth and more sustainable wages etc. But not this one. 

Not one where we have an U25 / U23 player cap - we will never get anywhere with that. There is is no process to trust without experienced players etc. being bought.

[chara]

1 hour ago, Max Fowler said:

Again Chara - Chelsea is an incredible investment opportunity for them.

Heard a good point yesterday - "Chelsea fans aren't willing to be patient and trust the process." Actually I and many I believe would 100% be patient and behind a longer-term project prioritising youth and more sustainable wages etc. But not this one. 

Not one where we have an U25 / U23 player cap - we will never get anywhere with that. There is is no process to trust without experienced players etc. being bought.

Thanks Max...that is the slippery slope...we would all be "Patient etc" given a project we could believe in and support.

We have Raheem who to be fair to has been a disappointment if only because he is playing as most Football watchers expected him to,,,not a player who would ever carry a burden or "Atlas " role for any club,,,a cameo and occasional high performance player doing what he has always done,,and the oldest player in the EPL,,,a wonderful player past his prime giving his all but with no real support around him...too much expected of him.........and then we have the "trading stock,,,,buy and sell like a market stall,,the "Trotters Independant Traders"...or TIT ..plus a prime piece of Real Estate just begging for a buyer and a move to the Hemel Hempstead future Trading Development Investment Park.

A grim future indeed...but to repeat...I'm tired and paranoid...even think Chelsea will win tomorrow (today for the UK..nearly 3-30 am for you all)

 

Edited April 4 by chara

[Max Fowler]

Has anyone mentioned the expected 20% (season) ticket hike yet? Mutiny is coming

[ROTG]

37 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

Has anyone mentioned the expected 20% (season) ticket hike yet? Mutiny is coming

Somebody has to help pay for the club's recent purchases.

[ROTG]

5 hours ago, xceleryx said:

True, although as I've expressed previously we're still going to be able to turn a profit on some of these younger players we've purchased providing we're getting them in at a relatively decent fee and wages. Players like DDF, Casadei, etc were all snapped up at fairly affordable prices for this day and age. If we were to sell them over the next couple of years there's a pretty solid likelihood we'll still generate profits from them. 

With the way football is these days player values can skyrocket after a few good months of football, even if that's at a Championship level for example. Plus there's just the general manner in which football inflation raises player value through moves to bigger clubs. 

If we're then able to loan some of these guys out and have some of the cost offset through loan fees and wage contributions that'll only further reduced their cost to us. 

We're going to continue to snap up young players when we can, the key will be of course to make sure we're not paying out the ass to do so. As long as they're affordable we'll stand a decent chance of making a return if they don't end up developing and holding a first team role here. 

You are in for a big shock. 

Apart from every man and his dog now doing the let's buy every prospect for the future, the new equation of PL points deduction will more than likely drive the price of players down rather than up, as demonstrated with the lack of activity in January's transfer window. 

This summer's transfer window, could well be and indication of how things look long term with transfers and transfer fees 

[kev61]

3 hours ago, chara said:

Thanks Max...that is the slippery slope...we would all be "Patient etc" given a project we could believe in and support.

We have Raheem who to be fair to has been a disappointment if only because he is playing as most Football watchers expected him to,,,not a player who would ever carry a burden or "Atlas " role for any club,,,a cameo and occasional high performance player doing what he has always done,,and the oldest player in the EPL,,,a wonderful player past his prime giving his all but with no real support around him...too much expected of him.........and then we have the "trading stock,,,,buy and sell like a market stall,,the "Trotters Independant Traders"...or TIT ..plus a prime piece of Real Estate just begging for a buyer and a move to the Hemel Hempstead future Trading Development Investment Park.

A grim future indeed...but to repeat...I'm tired and paranoid...even think Chelsea will win tomorrow (today for the UK..nearly 3-30 am for you all)

 

The problem with Sterling is,he was past his prime a long time ago.We paid top dollar for him in a whirlwind of stupidity.

Apparently Clearlake have a plan!.Surely an organization that have billions can't get it wrong?.

There is a precedent set by American owners that is Man U.

[ROTG]

42 minutes ago, kev61 said:

The problem with Sterling is,he was past his prime a long time ago.We paid top dollar for him in a whirlwind of stupidity.

TT wanted him, and TB obliged. 

Can't blame the creamcakes for that one. 

Edited April 4 by ROTG

[Max Fowler]

39 minutes ago, ROTG said:

TT wanted him, and TB obliged. 

Can't blame the creamcakes for that one. 

I think Sterling was a great signing at the time and still do. He’s not doing great but TT was right to sign him and could have got the best out of him. Sterling would work better with strict tactical instruction like Guardiola and TT - freedom to express under Poch doesn’t suit him atm.

[Sciatika]

1 hour ago, kev61 said:

The problem with Sterling is,he was past his prime a long time ago.We paid top dollar for him in a whirlwind of stupidity.

Apparently Clearlake have a plan!.Surely an organization that have billions can't get it wrong?.

There is a precedent set by American owners that is Man U.

Sterling was 27 when we signed him.

[kev61]

1 minute ago, Sciatika said:

Sterling was 27 when we signed him.

Which means what? - some players are finished when they should be at their peak.Some players are at their peak when they should be winding down.

Now that is a question for the stat's  people!

[kev61]

50 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

I think Sterling was a great signing at the time and still do. He’s not doing great but TT was right to sign him and could have got the best out of him. Sterling would work better with strict tactical instruction like Guardiola and TT - freedom to express under Poch doesn’t suit him atm.

He was a crumbs player in the grand  theme of things.

He was never a decent player in elite company and yet his wages suggest otherwise.

[Max Fowler]

9 minutes ago, kev61 said:

He was a crumbs player in the grand  theme of things.

He was never a decent player in elite company and yet his wages suggest otherwise.

IMO no need to call out individuals anymore Kev.

This project is a collective failure and frankly I think there would be quite a few players who would do better if they had a better strategy above them

[kev61]

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

TT wanted him, and TB obliged. 

Can't blame the creamcakes for that one. 

Who was responsible for signing Palmer?.Don't tell me it was a long thought out process.We got lucky.Instead of following Brighton we should be looking to buy Man Cities rejects.

[kev61]

17 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

IMO no need to call out individuals anymore Kev.

This project is a collective failure and frankly I think there would be quite a few players who would do better if they had a better strategy above them

OK.We're all in it together....if only👍

[Chelsea_Matt]

6 hours ago, chara said:

Thanks Max...that is the slippery slope...we would all be "Patient etc" given a project we could believe in and support.

We have Raheem who to be fair to has been a disappointment if only because he is playing as most Football watchers expected him to,,,not a player who would ever carry a burden or "Atlas " role for any club,,,a cameo and occasional high performance player doing what he has always done,,and the oldest player in the EPL,,,a wonderful player past his prime giving his all but with no real support around him...too much expected of him.........and then we have the "trading stock,,,,buy and sell like a market stall,,the "Trotters Independant Traders"...or TIT ..plus a prime piece of Real Estate just begging for a buyer and a move to the Hemel Hempstead future Trading Development Investment Park.

A grim future indeed...but to repeat...I'm tired and paranoid...even think Chelsea will win tomorrow (today for the UK..nearly 3-30 am for you all)

 

If this project was actually going somewhere that would be different. But imo it just isn’t, either on or off the pitch. As I’ve said before I think it’s set us back a decade. 

[Chelsea_Matt]

41 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

IMO no need to call out individuals anymore Kev.

This project is a collective failure and frankly I think there would be quite a few players who would do better if they had a better strategy above them

…like signing for a better club. I can see Palmer leaving soon  enough  espesh if those clowns sell Conor. 

[Chelsea_Matt]

1 hour ago, Max Fowler said:

I think Sterling was a great signing at the time and still do. He’s not doing great but TT was right to sign him and could have got the best out of him. Sterling would work better with strict tactical instruction like Guardiola and TT - freedom to express under Poch doesn’t suit him atm.

I agree. I know he has had some bad moments - who hasn’t in this squad? - but I still rate him highly and am happy he’s with us, though I think he’ll leave this summer.

[kev61]

7 minutes ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

I agree. I know he has had some bad moments - who hasn’t in this squad? - but I still rate him highly and am happy he’s with us, though I think he’ll leave this summer.

I rate him but he wasn't worth the money and he will only decline with this team.

[Ham]

The owners can't catch a break.

One minute they aren't buying anyone with experience and when they do, a 27 year old is past it. 

 

 

[Mark Kelly]

2 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

 freedom to express under Poch doesn’t suit him atm.

Freedom to express?

Is that shorthand for " I've done as much running with these idiots as I can , now it's down to them" ?

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, kev61 said:

Who was responsible for signing Palmer?.Don't tell me it was a long thought out process.We got lucky.Instead of following Brighton we should be looking to buy Man Cities rejects.

Recommend by shields as was Latvia 

Palmer certainly looks the part, however I think we will get a better indication next season.

Just being a realist, rather than jumping on the bandwagon of being the next since sunblest.

One just has to look how quick MM went from hero to villain in the eyes of some, even before he jumped ship. 

[Mark Kelly]

2 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Recommend by shields as was Latvia 

 

Did he go there on his holidays? Looks a bit cold to me.

[Bison]

As expected tbh.