Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Neiler]

They made a massive profit in 2024.

Still looks a bit shaky, despite the 200 mill profit in 24 mate.

We already know they haven't failed - because its been confirmed no one has.

It doesn't mean whatever trick they've pulled this time shouldn't be scrutinized.

What's clear to me is the PL want Chelsea to keep investing, bringing the best players to the UK becuase it increases their brand and subsequent TV rights deals - absolute conflict or interests at play. While they dont want to disenfranchise their global following or rather TV subs - which is surprisingly big - more so then in the UK.

You only get mullard if all you can afford is Jack Harrison on loan.

They dont want to curb Chelsea's spending.

 

[allen]

Football isn't about winning trophies anymore for owners, that's a dream the marketing people sell the fans, the real goal is getting into as many money making competitions as you can to increase the value of your investment and to wield influence as clubs get ever more powerful.

Right, except Chelsea are losing hundreds of millions every season - a billion or more over a decade.

This is my point: I can’t slice Chelsea any way and see value for anyone.

 

[Neiler]

Right, except Chelsea are losing hundreds of millions every season - a billion or more over a decade.

This is my point: I can’t slice Chelsea any way and see value for anyone.

That’s not their intention though, they have a plan to make money, the fact they aren’t doing it well, doesn’t change the intent or motivation.

Often in long term investment, projects are loss making until they aren’t and they clearly have been investing with a strategy. We are in fact similar, it will be a few years before we turn a profit - so why are TFG bothered with us. This type of investment yields a better return on your money instead of having it sitting in the bank or on the market.

Chelsea are worth more now probably then when Clearlake took them over. But there is a distinction also how much money Chelsea loose and how much money Clearlake loose and those are two very different things as we know via Moshiri.

 

[allen]

That’s not their intention though, they have a plan to make money, the fact they aren’t doing it well, doesn’t change the intent or motivation.

Often in long term investment projects are loss making until they aren’t and they clearly have been investing with a strategy. We are in fact similar, it will be a few years before we turn a profit - so why are TFG bothered with us. This type of investment years a better return on your money by having it sitting in the bank or on the market.

Chelsea are worth more now probably then when Clearlake took them over. But there is a distinction also how much money Chelsea loose and how much money Clearlake loose and those are two very different things as we know via Moshiri.

I understand the concept of an investment strategy that bears fruit down the line.

But I can't even understand their perspective on this - where is the money in this strategy, down the line?

What even is the strategy? And what needs to change to reverse these eye-watering losses?

 

[Neiler]

I understand the concept of an investment strategy that bears fruit down the line.

But I can't even understand their perspective on this - where is the money in this strategy, down the line?

What even is the strategy? And what needs to change to reverse these eye-watering losses?

As i said earlier they have a plan but that doesn't necessarily mean that plan is effective.

My read would be:

The club is estimated to be worth £500mill more then the purchase price of the shares when they bought it from the UK Gov.

They've gone down the early City loss making route of snaffling the best young talent for their academy/first team - the investment strategy around that is for short term losses that will lead eventually lead to long term appreciation in the value of players registration. They sold £314mill worth of talent last summer - its key to their investment strategy.

At a point the large investment will stop and they will trim around the edge, from a broad base

All of the above they will hope to lift all boats in terms of revenue and as such increase the value of their shares/ownership - at the moment they are turning over 490 mill - over two and half times more then us for example. Things like winning the ECL and CWC also help in terms of commercials.

I actually think they are going to spend big again this summer - they will have over £700 mill in turnover this coming window with SCR.

There is also a power piece to this behind the scenes and likely PIF involvement - if you wanted to go down that rabbit hole.

All of the above they hope to raise turnover and share value really, as said Chelsea losses aren't really Clearlakes.

 

[McCallsVolley]

In SCR terms if you give someone a 20 year contract at a deflated wage annually to comply but huge amount overall then deregister from your squad after 7 years then....

 

[Moomin]

Still looks a bit shaky, despite the 200 mill profit in 24 mate.

We already know they haven't failed - because its been confirmed no one has.

It doesn't mean whatever trick they've pulled this time shouldn't be scrutinized.

What's clear to me is the PL want Chelsea to keep investing, bringing the best players to the UK becuase it increases their brand and subsequent TV rights deals - absolute conflict or interests at play. While they dont want to disenfranchise their global following or rather TV subs - which is surprisingly big - more so then in the UK.

You only get mullard if all you can afford is Jack Harrison on loan.

They dont want to curb Chelsea's spending.

They don't want to charge anyone for the reasons you said.

Look at us when we had the biggest COVID losses signed off by the Premier League and why the likes of Burnley, Leeds and a few others asked questions why we got away with it.

 

[Neiler]

They don't want to charge anyone for the reasons you said.

Look at us when we had the biggest COVID losses signed off by the Premier League and why the likes of Burnley, Leeds and a few others asked questions why we got away with it.

Utd breached last season as well and they also let them off on some made up allowance.

It was only ever a power play around independent regulation.

In the process though, fans will never trust the PL administration again - its transparently corrupt, with every increased decision comparatively - that will include the City outcome also.

 

[Moomin]

Utd breached last season as well and they also let them off on some made up allowance.

It was only ever a power play around independent regulation.

In the process though, fans will never trust the PL administration again - its transparently corrupt, with every increased decision comparatively - that will include the City outcome also.

People are living in a dream world if they think a Government regulator will be any improvement to what we have now.

 

[Neiler]

People are living in a dream world if they think a Government regulator will be any improvement to what we have now.

Already proving ineffective.

 

[Tipp blue]

They made a massive profit in 2024.

yes, my fault, I didn't look at the years, just took the last 3 losses and went for it.

 

[Tipp blue]

People are living in a dream world if they think a Government regulator will be any improvement to what we have now.

Applying rules evenly across the entire league would be all they need to do to make it miles better.

 

[Marcus Kendall]

Or having proper ownership rules where clubs can't be owned by oligarchs and nation states

 

[mahermi1]

yes, my fault, I didn't look at the years, just took the last 3 losses and went for it.

The reason they made a £200m profit was that they sold their Women's team for £128m that year, still made a profit like but a bit less than £72m. We also sold our women's team last year for £49m. But seriously how anyone can defend Chelsea is unbelievable, selling Hotels to themselves, paid £67m last year on agents fees, more than any other club, highest spend on players, putting players on 7 and 8 year deals, before it was conveniently stopped for everyone else and now caught out fiddling the books this went on for years...and they got away with a paltry fine, when our disciplinary committee found that it was useless giving super rich owners fines as they had so much wealth it wouldn't matter. Unlucky that Chelsea's owners are so poor isn't it. They gained a sporting advantage and like us should have been given a sporting penalty. Lastly Chelsea were one of the fat cats who tried to fill their pockets by quite possibly killing the Premier league, again found guilty and given a paltry fine. Yes there's a lot to be sorry about poor Chelsea for, our fans at the last home game, including me gave Chelsea and the Premier league the lack of respect they truly deserve.

 

[Marcus Kendall]

The reason they made a £200m profit was that they sold their Women's team for £128m that year, still made a profit like but a bit less than £72m. We also sold our women's team last year for £49m. But seriously how anyone can defend Chelsea is unbelievable, selling Hotels to themselves, paid £67m last year on agents fees, more than any other club, highest spend on players, putting players on 7 and 8 year deals, before it was conveniently stopped for everyone else and now caught out fiddling the books this went on for years...and they got away with a paltry fine, when our disciplinary committee found that it was useless giving super rich owners fines as they had so much wealth it wouldn't matter. Unlucky that Chelsea's owners are so poor isn't it. They gained a sporting advantage and like us should have been given a sporting penalty. Lastly Chelsea were one of the fat cats who tried to fill their pockets by quite possibly killing the Premier league, again found guilty and given a paltry fine. Yes there's a lot to be sorry about poor Chelsea for, our fans at the last home game, including me gave Chelsea and the Premier league the lack of respect they truly deserve.

Superbly put. Factor in their stadium isn't exactly the biggest so I'm not sure their match day revenue helps them cover losses either despite the London factor