Jump to content

Chelsea owners and board


Max Fowler

Ownership buyout  

24 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you want to have full ownership of the club?

    • Eghbali and Clearlake
      0
    • Todd Boehly
      24
    • Mark Walter
      0
    • Hansjörg Wyss
      0

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 13/09/24 at 18:00

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

I don’t want to rub it in, but there are certain fans and certain posters on here who have been effectively arguing, “this was all part of the new owners’ plan” this whole time, any time things shit seemed to be hitting the fan. 

I therefore can’t help feeling a bit of smugness at this news, or was this all part of Todd and Clearlake’s grand master project too? Y3 Q1: The Great Falling Out

I was fully behind their initial plan of rebuilding the squad by moving on expensive, overpaid flops, stale players who were taking us nowhere fast and bringing in younger, hungrier players.  In fact, it was exactly what I wanted to see happen!

Unfortunately, since then there's been a drip, drip of one  negative thing after another and the complete balls up since the highly promising end to last season has been the final straw for me. 

Edited by boratsbrother
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have increasingly come to the conclusion that if I were in charge of a top-level football club, I would not have a clue about what to do. This is probably because my engagement with football is what happens on the field rather than running it as a business. Consequently, I have no idea if we would be better off with Boehly or Eghbali (if that is even the choice). 

Come to think of it, if I were the coach, I wouldn't have a clue what to do either (or the DoF), but I would enjoy it a lot more.

Edited by Sciatika
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sciatika said:

I have increasingly come to the conclusion that if I were in charge of a top-level football club, I would not have a clue about what to do. This is probably because my engagement with football is what happens on the field rather than running it as a business. Consequently, I have no idea if we would be better off with Boehly or Eghbali (if that is even the choice). 

Come to think of it, if I were the coach, I wouldn't have a clue what to do either (or the DoF), but I would enjoy it a lot more.

Is there anything that’s gone on, or will go on with the current incumbents that make you feel that they’ve got any more of a clue than you (or me, for that matter)?

In reality, we may have done a bit better on the football side - Because we’ve got the first clue of how to build a team. 

At the time the UK’s politicians sold us down the river with their holier than thou sanctions and demand that a new owner be found, I said that these owners were not going to be in the clubs best interests. No one makes substantive profit from football clubs, certainly not the ROI that these ***** would want to cover the outlay. 

After thinking about it for a while yesterday, I’d think that there are investors behind the two main protagonists who are getting twitchy and demanding action to protect their investments.

They’re as bad as each other, one has got better public facing characteristics - that’s all there is to see and neither are fit and proper owners.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Holymoly said:

What pisses me off no end is that smarmy tosser Kaveh Solhekol on Scouse Sports constantly calling him Todd Burley. Chief reporter my arse, he is just the mouthpiece for an army of spies and internet warriors that Sky employ. He probably does it because no-one knows how to pronounce his stupid fucking name.

I’m getting a feeling you’re not fond of him! 😂

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Holymoly said:

What pisses me off no end is that smarmy tosser Kaveh Solhekol on Scouse Sports constantly calling him Todd Burley. Chief reporter my arse, he is just the mouthpiece for an army of spies and internet warriors that Sky employ. He probably does it because no-one knows how to pronounce his stupid fucking name.

Frankly, he is just representative of the majority of the presenters on that medium these days. Anyone with a bit of character, straight and to the point comment and a critical analysis have been binned.

And as for their (last season anyway) Chief Football Reporter, the one who was/is the girlfriend of Sadio Mane when he was at the red s***e, completely impartial of course 🤔 - Talk about ticking boxes.

Only ones left that I bother to listen to now are a couple on the match coverage - Roy Keane and Graeme Souness. Proper footballers, who do tone it down a bit, but are frank in their comments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, boratsbrother said:

I was fully behind their initial plan of rebuilding the squad by moving on expensive, overpaid flops, stale players who were taking us nowhere fast and bringing in younger, hungrier players.  In fact, it was exactly what I wanted to see happen!

Unfortunately, since then there's been a drip, drip of one  negative thing after another and the complete balls up since the highly promising end to last season has been the final straw for me. 

They weren’t getting us nowhere though. We won the Champions League the season before Clearlake took over. The squad needed gradually refreshing and improving not ripping apart and starting from scratch 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, east lower said:

Is there anything that’s gone on, or will go on with the current incumbents that make you feel that they’ve got any more of a clue than you (or me, for that matter)?

In reality, we may have done a bit better on the football side - Because we’ve got the first clue of how to build a team. 

At the time the UK’s politicians sold us down the river with their holier than thou sanctions and demand that a new owner be found, I said that these owners were not going to be in the clubs best interests. No one makes substantive profit from football clubs, certainly not the ROI that these ***** would want to cover the outlay. 

After thinking about it for a while yesterday, I’d think that there are investors behind the two main protagonists who are getting twitchy and demanding action to protect their investments.

They’re as bad as each other, one has got better public facing characteristics - that’s all there is to see and neither are fit and proper owners.

They are making money bro - whatever happens. Arguments will be about how to maximise ROI and grow the brand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Holymoly said:

What pisses me off no end is that smarmy tosser Kaveh Solhekol on Scouse Sports constantly calling him Todd Burley. Chief reporter my arse, he is just the mouthpiece for an army of spies and internet warriors that Sky employ. He probably does it because no-one knows how to pronounce his stupid fucking name.

Is it just me that likes Kaveh?

Always fair with the club, even during the sanctions. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

They are making money bro - whatever happens. Arguments will be about how to maximise ROI and grow the brand

Can’t see how, just look at the numbers.  That’s probably why the natives (investors) are getting restless.

8 hours ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

Choosing between Todd and Eggy is like choosing to be shot or run over.

As I said earlier in the thread it’s like choosing between a kick in the b***ocks or a kick in the head. Neither’s acceptable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Max Fowler said:

They are making money bro - whatever happens. Arguments will be about how to maximise ROI and grow the brand

We're not even breaking even, so have no idea why you think anyone is making money out of us. What is your thinking on this?

We were never an investment anyone was pulling money out of on a regular basis. It was always about banking on PL and CL money being even bigger 5-10 years after purchase and being able to sell up at profit. Even if that held true, we're in no sporting shape to be a club that sees a penny of that extra money. The investors must see this, and be forming the view that having, idk, 60-70% of their money back to invest elsewhere is a much better bet for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

They are making money bro - whatever happens. Arguments will be about how to maximise ROI and grow the brand

How on earth can we be making money? 2 seasons out of the CL and probably a third, no shirt sponsor, unhappy fans…not how they envisioned things I’m sure; the only thing we have over the vulture capitalists is that they’re in too deep to pull out. 
 

(that’s what she said

Edited by Michael Tucker
Pointless and irritating emojis removed AGAIN.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

We're not even breaking even, so have no idea why you think anyone is making money out of us. What is your thinking on this?

We were never an investment anyone was pulling money out of on a regular basis. It was always about banking on PL and CL money being even bigger 5-10 years after purchase and being able to sell up at profit. Even if that held true, we're in no sporting shape to be a club that sees a penny of that extra money. The investors must see this, and be forming the view that having, idk, 60-70% of their money back to invest elsewhere is a much better bet for them. 

As I’ve stated multiple times, the value of Premier League clubs grows 9% season on season. They’ve slashed the wage bill and brought in lot a load of players with far better long-term value as assets. The value of finishing a place or two higher is only a couple of million in the Premier League. Yes, our stock may have decreased but the ever marching increase of the PL more than overcomes that, plus all the money they can make on these young players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, boratsbrother said:

Don't agree!

Season after season we were miles away in the league and only really qualifying for the CL because the likes of Arsenal and Utd were even more insipid than we were. 

We had zero creativity or goals in the dullest midfield I've seen in many a year. What made that midfield even  worse was they weren't even that good at the defensive side of the game either. What saved our arses was the defence and Mendy having a once in a lifetime season. The attack was almost as feeble as the midfield going  game after game where we  struggled to get a couple of good goals efforts on target. 

Rudi and Christensen (up until his contract issues) were levels above any pairing we can currently field,  but apart from those two, I was more than happy to see the back of every single player we sold during  that first 18 months.

Agree to disagree, bro. We’ve won the Champions League twice in our history. No offence to us, but we should know our place. We’re not Real Madrid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Max Fowler said:

As I’ve stated multiple times, the value of Premier League clubs grows 9% season on season. They’ve slashed the wage bill and brought in lot a load of players with far better long-term value as assets. The value of finishing a place or two higher is only a couple of million in the Premier League. Yes, our stock may have decreased but the ever marching increase of the PL more than overcomes that, plus all the money they can make on these young players.

But (and I'll make this my only response on this, because I think it is self-evidently true) ...

We've made huge losses every year of their ownership, and are on course to repeat that this year. Even if we were hugely successful next season, we'd really only be in break-even territory. So the fundamental reality of what is happening is the ownership is putting in money to cover those costs. It is nowhere near drawing any out, and absolutely no one has made a penny as yet. I'd agree, no one was ever likely to given we're talking about millions of pounds for football achievement in the context of a multi-billion pound investment.

What you are talking about is what "the books" look like, and they do not represent current profit and won't really mean anything until the time comes to sell. And at that point, there will be plenty of unknowable variables that influence who is looking to buy and for how much. But being a PL-winning, CL-qualifying club would make a huge difference to that.

I bought a flat with a mortgage about 5 years ago. If someone came to value it now and told me it was worth a few grand more than I'd paid, it would mean absolutely sod-all to my bottom line just of itself. I'd not have made a profit.

I expect some investors are inclined to hold their nerve and still think there will be a big return on an eventual sale. Others will see surer, sooner things and would rather have something to spend on that. True of any investment, but especially of one where almost nothing has gone to plan.

Edited by thevelourfog
Various typos!
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

Agree to disagree, bro. We’ve won the Champions League twice in our history. No offence to us, but we should know our place. We’re not Real Madrid.

I'll tell you a big secret: we won the CupWinnersCup by beating Real Madrid, and on top of that, they never won that trophy in the years it existed (1961-1999)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thevelourfog said:

But (and I'll make this my only response on this, because I think it is self-evidently true) ...

We've made huge losses every year of their ownership, and are on course to repeat that this year. Even if we were hugely successful next season, we'd really only be in break-even territory. So the fundamental reality of what is happening is the ownership is putting in money to cover those costs. It is nowhere near drawing any out, and absolutely no one has made a penny as yet. I'd agree, no one was ever likely to given we're talking about millions of pounds for football achievement in the context of a multi-billion pound investment.

What you are talking about is what "the books" look like, and they do not represent current profit and won't really mean anything until the time comes to sell. And at that point, there will be plenty of unknowable variables that influence who is looking to buy and for how much. But being a PL-winning, CL-qualifying club would make a huge difference to that.

I bought a flat with a mortgage about 5 years ago. If someone came to value it now and told me it was worth a few grand more than I'd paid, it would mean absolutely sod-all to my bottom line just of itself. I'd not have made a profit.

I expect some investors are inclined to hold their nerve and still think there will be a big return on an eventual sale. Others will see surer, sooner things and would rather have something to spend on that. True of any investment, but especially of one where almost nothing has gone to plan.

Exactly, but eventually when they sell, they will make money. Longer they hold on the more the asset will grow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

Not necessarily a foregone conclusion though.

I think it pretty much is. Whether or not they balls it up massively and make a small profit or not is a kind of moot point - I think the owners are arguing about the size of profits they can make and best ways of achieving that. It does feel like Boehly is probably pushing more of the sporting / cultural aspects and that Clearlake really is the faceless investment firm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have to cover both the principal and the cost of its use. They will compare their return to what they have made by deploying the same amount of capital in their other investments over the same period and whether that return meets the expectations of their customers,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Max Fowler said:

I think it pretty much is. Whether or not they balls it up massively and make a small profit or not is a kind of moot point - I think the owners are arguing about the size of profits they can make and best ways of achieving that. It does feel like Boehly is probably pushing more of the sporting / cultural aspects and that Clearlake really is the faceless investment firm.

Before taking any sides, it would be beneficial to understand which is in favour of buying potential talent, hiring of championship level coaches and keeping their fingers crossed in hope all of the planets will align "project 2130" versus the one where the penny has dropped, on that  particular philosophy being flawed and having a winning squad a top draw coach, bring the rewards of winning the PL, CL football, blue chip sponsorship and increased revenue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...