Roman Abramovich plans to sell Chelsea | SOLD for £4.25BN
- Thread starter Ali Dia
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Wishful thinking - though the threat of a points deduction should we fall into administration is real and on that basis we might miss out on top 4. UEFA haven't done anything to censure Chelsea though.
Surely in that doomsday scenario, they would have us start with -12 points the following season rather retrospectively deduct points from this season.
Well let's face it, playing Werner and Lukaku is like carrying 4 players
They must be living in the World's End estate.
I'd be hiding in a basement too, if I lived there.
The Italian job in relation to Chelsea I’ve had to Google it and I’m in my 40’s
is It some link to the 1969 film of the same name or the year we won the super cup with Zola and Vialli in the team?
Ah good point - not sure when the deadline is for that. Believe it's somewhere in March so we might be past that?
Derby were deducted midseason but I doubt CFC is in any real danger. I don't think the gov't is really interested in punishing the club itself and will allow anything reasonable to keep it afloat.
I suppose even Ukrainians want the 'freedom' to be able to chant "Roman, Roman" during the minute silence for Ukrainians being bombed above their basements from Roman's past ally trying to take away their freedom.
Ouch, my head hurts trying to get round that one.
Maybe it will help if I think about Trump supporters drinking bleach and the world might make some sense.I suppose even Ukrainians want the 'freedom' to be able to chant "Roman, Roman" during the minute silence for Ukrainians being bombed above their basements from Roman's past ally trying to take away their freedom.
Ouch, my head hurts trying to get round that one.
What? They're saying they're Ukrainian fans who are finding joy in watching Chelsea and that club is bigger than it's owner. Not sure what it is you're going on about.
I suppose even Ukrainians want the 'freedom' to be able to chant "Roman, Roman" during the minute silence for Ukrainians being bombed above their basements from Roman's past ally trying to take away their freedom.
Ouch, my head hurts trying to get round that one.
Liverpool fans sitting on their high horse booing the national anthem. Good job
Most of our debt is older from what I understand. We are/were near the point of self sufficiency. Which still begs the question: if it’s about Ronan Abramovich and not the club, why not let them sell tickets, popcorn, Chelsea scarves, etc?
He is frozen out of all of it, so they are specifically sanctioning the CLUB from making money. They were originally going to seize even their prize money.
They didn’t attempt anything like that with any other business Roman was involved with.
There is zero purpose to that other than people wanting revenge on Chelsea for having success under a Russian owner.
And man …more “all his crimes” retorts from others. If he did them, fine. But I have not seen a single verified crime levied against him. The one they eventually mentioned, Evraz making the tanks, turned out to be not true.
Anyway, he had already agreed to sell the club week(s)? before. He was setting up a group consisting mostly of UK and US people to give the net funds of the sale to Ukraine charities (he wasn’t deciding on the charities … for those cynically saying it would go to Russian troops…). He never TOOK money from the club to begin with. And then he was legally frozen out of any action related to the club.
so what, other than retribution, is the reasoning behind seizing prize money, prohibiting ticket sales, announcing before even a change in ownership that we can’t buy/sell players?
I saw a response up there that said “that’s the price of being owned by ‘shady’ people.” And that person may well be an MP and an Arsenal fan … because that’s exactly the way the government is acting.
Yes because booing the national anthem which I don’t agree with but given the history between the city of Liverpool and the government I can see why it happened, and then equating that with Liverpool fans calling you out for singing romans name is utterly ridiculous.
It’s a perspective that shouldn’t even warrant comparison.
You understand wrong. Chelsea are nowhere near self sufficient.
You also seem to fundamentally misunderstand how sanctions normally work - the government is doing us a favour by allowing the club to continue competing. This does not normally occur under sanctions, so frankly the withholding of revenue from programmes is small potatoes.
Booing the national anthem is good though.
Everyone had net deficits after the two Covid years. Ours ONLY being 139 million proves my point more than yours. The NFL has probably the greatest “guaranteed” income in the world, and 20 of the 32 teams still lost gobs of money during that period. Without Romelu Lukaku we would have been near net even… during the Covid disaster . That’s pretty impressive. We are not revenue generator like Man United, no. But the days of every dollar having to come from Roman were over as well.
And no, that is not how sanctions against an individual work. Which was exactly my point. They are behaving as if the CLUB is sanctioned.
Last edited:
Did you stop being a Liverpool fan when your manager and fellow fans were cheering for (and wearing t-shirts supporting) a racist just after he'd been found guilty of racially abusing someone? Asking for a friend.
Or just maybe our clubs are bigger than any individuals?
If Chelsea are allowed outside funding then they should receive a points deduction imo. That’s beyond ridiculous
Ah, yes Liverpool fans, those highly pious and saintly bunch who:
1. Supported and sung the name of a player who was convicted of racist abuse and felt that it was a good idea their players wore shirts supporting him too.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16291583
2. Stole tickets off children at the 2007 CL Athens final.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...Liverpool-fans-branded-worst-Europe-UEFA.html
*particular favourite part of this story was how Liverpool complained that people with forged tickets got in, even though their fans were the ones principally forging them
3. Had 14 convinctions for manslaughter over Heysel and also got English teams banned from Europe for years'.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heysel_Stadium_disaster
4. The fans that when 'celebrating' their last title win, set fires to public buildings in their own City and fought among themselves.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...ield-premier-league-celebration-a9636251.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-53203765
5. The team that consistently sings songs celebrating Munich and hurl homopobic abuse at Chelsea fans.
https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/klo...ool-rent-boys-chant/tqb7ke88lftq1w6mzik5wjm5b
6. The fans that consistently turn up and hurl missiles at away team buses whe arriving at Anfield.
https://news.sky.com/story/manchest...eld-in-liverpool-11316933?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
Yes, those fans are so great, I can always understand how they feel that they can comment with piety on the behaviour of other teams fans.
We lost 102 million in 18/19, ya know
Blue gaffer tape is your friend.
Whatever news sources you’re consuming, change them. You are getting this so wrong.
The reason that they are sanctioning the club is because it belongs to a man that has ties to Putin and a more specific point of;
“Has been involved in destabilising Ukraine and undermining and threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine via Evraz”
The only lever the world can pull is Sanctions. (I’m assuming you don’t want war to happen in order for you to carry on buying popcorn at Stamford Bridge).
Your club is being sanctioned as it’a drowning in the filthy money of someone linked to war. Why are you defending them? Do you truly believe he should be able to just sell up and you guys carry on as you were? If I smash a window with a hammer and sell you the hammer…. I’ve still smashed the damn window.
Your club was purchased to launder an unsavoury Russians assets. This is your bed. You must lay in it. It’s really weird to bleat about it. Why do you need this to be verified? Nobody gives a damn about your threshold of proof. We have one of the bluntest governments on earth that’s fully in bed with Russian money. That they have actually done something should be so far above what you need to believe all this.
Nobody gives a Fcuk about your football club. It’s war. Thousands are dying. It’s not a petty squabble.
That comment for me is sort of naive because the income streams that in effect are being curtailed did not/ don’t come from RAs pocket.
Exactly. They are an asset used to park RA's wealth, nothing more nothing less. As long as he remains sanctioned all his income and assets should be frozen, from his yachts to his townhouses to his football club. Allow them a maintenance expense to keep running but nothing more should be allowed.
It surely isn't too difficult to let the club operate as normal but ensure Abramovich cannot access any incoming funds. If they can oversee the sale of the club and make sure a penny doesn't go into an account that is controlled by Abramovich, surely they can set something similar up with the club's day to day operations too.
You can't separate the two. To run the club normally they need money coming in which goes towards increasing the value of an asset owned by RA. An asset freeze doesn't have to be permanent, and they cant have RA accumulating wealth during the frozen period just access it at the end. Money going out does the opposite, and helps dissipate the value to potential unknown locations. The law provides for just enough going in and out to meet basic obligations.
So where does the money go if Roman doesn't get anything?
If Chelsea defeat Newcastle, we can safely say their owner will never visit Saudi embassy
The UK Treasury
Ah, yes Liverpool fans, those highly pious and saintly bunch who:
1. Supported and sung the name of a player who was convicted of racist abuse and felt that it was a good idea their players wore shirts supporting him too.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16291583
2. Stole tickets off children at the 2007 CL Athens final.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...Liverpool-fans-branded-worst-Europe-UEFA.html
*particular favourite part of this story was how Liverpool complained that people with forged tickets got in, even though their fans were the ones principally forging them
3. Had 14 convinctions for manslaughter over Heysel and also got English teams banned from Europe for years'.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heysel_Stadium_disaster
4. The fans that when 'celebrating' their last title win, set fires to public buildings in their own City and fought among themselves.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...ield-premier-league-celebration-a9636251.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-53203765
5. The team that consistently sings songs celebrating Munich and hurl homopobic abuse at Chelsea fans.
https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/klo...ool-rent-boys-chant/tqb7ke88lftq1w6mzik5wjm5b
6. The fans that consistently turn up and hurl missiles at away team buses whe arriving at Anfield.
https://news.sky.com/story/manchest...eld-in-liverpool-11316933?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
Yes, those fans are so great, I can always understand how they feel that they can comment with piety on the behaviour of other teams fans.
Pashun la
So does Roman have any say in the sale or not?
the word “direct” must have Herculean strength the way it was used to carry this statement
man, United won’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the league with these state sponsored clubs.
Apparently not
oh yeah...i'm sure it doesn't. Just like the rest of the oil rich consortiums that have bought City and PSG
. Can this be politically clean though. Surely not. So hope it won't go through under pl owner test but again that's another joke. Comical over all.*direct*
No direct links. Hmmm it's a tough one this based on my limited research.
The Saudi Research and Media Group (SRMG) has appointed the Saudi Media Company (SMC), a leader in digital advertising sales across the Middle East, as its exclusive media representative. Based on the agreement, SMC will handle commercial advertising sales for all SRMG brands and platforms, including audio-visual, print and digital, effective November 8th, 2021.
SRMG have direct links, and are seen as a group that provide soft power for the regime in western countries, but SMC is SRMG's exclusive media representative. The links aren't direct and to what extent can you tie all companies together to the regime. BUT in a country like SA most companies will have links and ties to the regime.