O/T:- Roman Abramovich hands over Chelsea control

[irishpete]

Meaningless cr@p. He still owns it.

Exactly, non news story. Media shouldn't even give it time

[jackal2]

Pity he couldn't come out and say he disagrees with his friend Putin's actions which would have had a lot more meaning.

True, although a dangerous thing to do if he's currently in Russia!

It might be an unfashionable opinion right now, but I think Roman Abramovich has actually been a pretty good football club owner. When he first arrived at Chelsea I thought it would be the classic 'billionaire buys toy and then gets bored with it' story, but he's been around for a long time and seems to have a genuine interest in football and at least some sense of responsibility towards the club he owns.

Obviously, you have to question how he accumulated the wealth he uses to bankroll Chelsea, and his relationship with Putin, but let's face it, you can question the morality and the funding sources of a number of other top club owners, not least the new owners of Newcastle.

Football fans are understandably having a crisis of conscience right now in view of what's happening in the Ukraine, but quite a lot of them soon forget such moral concerns when the next multi-million pound big name signing arrives at their club. The same goes for TV broadcasters like Sky who will tell you on their main news channel how terrible and unfair the events in the Ukraine are (which indeed they are), but will then tell you on Sky Sports News how all these big-name signings (funded by questionable sources) are so exciting make the Premier League the best in the world.

[jackal2]

Abramovich is apparently trying to broker a peace deal between Russia and the Ukraine after the Ukrainian side reached out to him using their mutual connections through the Jewish community:

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...-b2024788.html

Could just be a PR line to mitigate his situation at Chelsea, although the rationale does sound plausible as he has a foot of sorts in both camps. I can see how he would be motivated to bring this conflict to end ASAP because it certainly isn't doing his interests any favours!

[Robertomac]

but he's been around for a long time and seems to have a genuine interest in football and at least some sense of responsibility towards the club he owns.

I'm sure I read that Chelsea has a debt to him of £1.5bn. If true, it raises a few questions over responsible ownership.

[jackal2]

I'm sure I read that Chelsea has a debt to him of £1.5bn. If true, it raises a few questions over responsible ownership.

Chelsea have a unique ownership structure, wherein the club’s debt (about £1.3 billion owed to Abramovich) has been converted to debt held in a holding company, Fordstam Limited. While on one hand, the debt exposure towards related parties is significant, on the other, Chelsea have no interest-bearing financial debt owed to other parties, such as financial institutions. This bit of financial hand-waving means that Chelsea, as a club, are essentially debt-free, though Abramovich could theoretically call in the full amount owed, which could lead to an interesting situation. Though in practice would essentially mean he’s selling the club and the new buyer would have to fulfill that debt.

https://fanbanter.co.uk/ranked-premi...biggest-debts/

It could get interesting if Roman was subject to sanctions and decided to pull the plug in an act of revenge, but so far he's never shown any desire to harm or abandon Chelsea. I don't get the feeling he would want that to be his legacy.

[Robertomac]

Chelsea have a unique ownership structure, wherein the club’s debt (about £1.3 billion owed to Abramovich) has been converted to debt held in a holding company, Fordstam Limited. While on one hand, the debt exposure towards related parties is significant, on the other, Chelsea have no interest-bearing financial debt owed to other parties, such as financial institutions. This bit of financial hand-waving means that Chelsea, as a club, are essentially debt-free, though Abramovich could theoretically call in the full amount owed, which could lead to an interesting situation. Though in practice would essentially mean he’s selling the club and the new buyer would have to fulfill that debt.

https://fanbanter.co.uk/ranked-premi...biggest-debts/

It could get interesting if Roman was subject to sanctions and decided to pull the plug in an act of revenge, but so far he's never shown any desire to harm or abandon Chelsea. I don't get the feeling he would want that to be his legacy.

Interesting. I know in effect all (or most) clubs are run on a similar basis whereby they are heavily indebted to their owners. What I find particularly striking is this is one of the biggest clubs in the world who have had plenty of success since he took charge, yet they are still, technically, massively in the red. For all the money swilling around at the top, it would seem it's still not enough?

[Old_pie]

Interesting. I know in effect all (or most) clubs are run on a similar basis whereby they are heavily indebted to their owners. What I find particularly striking is this is one of the biggest clubs in the world who have had plenty of success since he took charge, yet they are still, technically, massively in the red. For all the money swilling around at the top, it would seem it's still not enough?

Unless you have detailed access to all the accounts you have no idea how it is structured and for what reason. Owing money to themselves is hardly real debt. Owing the milkman is. Think about what would happen if you won £100m on EuroMillions and decided to plough £50m into Notts County. Would you make it a donation? Or a shareholding? Or leave it there as "debt"? Leaving an amount as debt merely gives the next buyer an idea of what you want for it. If the interest is nominal it will hardly be a drain on the club and most clubs who make profit are going to probably show it somewhere else.

[irishpete]

Unless you have detailed access to all the accounts you have no idea how it is structured and for what reason. Owing money to themselves is hardly real debt. Owing the milkman is. Think about what would happen if you won £100m on EuroMillions and decided to plough £50m into Notts County. Would you make it a donation? Or a shareholding? Or leave it there as "debt"? Leaving an amount as debt merely gives the next buyer an idea of what you want for it. If the interest is nominal it will hardly be a drain on the club and most clubs who make profit are going to probably show it somewhere else.

A Swiss billionaire offered Chelski for £2billion
Abramovic also looking to offload his property in UK

[Old_pie]

A Swiss billionaire offered Chelski for £2billion
Abramovic also looking to offload his property in UK

And how do you think the Swiss billionaire would show his £2billion in the accounts?

[jackal2]

Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich says he is planning to sell the club.

In a statement on the Premier League club's website, businessman Abramovich said it was an "incredibly difficult decision to make", which "pains" him.

Abramovich, 55, is alleged to have strong ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, which he has denied.

He says "all net proceeds from the sale" will be donated to the victims of the war in Ukraine.

In his statement, Abramovich added: "I have always taken decisions with the club's best interest at heart.

"In the current situation, I have therefore taken the decision to sell the club, as I believe this is in the best interest of the club, the fans, the employees, as well as the club's sponsors and partners.

"The sale of the club will not be fast-tracked but will follow due process. I will not be asking for any loans to be repaid.

"I have instructed my team to set up a charitable foundation where all net proceeds from the sale will be donated. The foundation will be for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60585081