Wait.
How comes Citys net debt is so much lower than us???????
You would think City have a financial model similar to Arsenal looking at that.
Fact is that Chelsea cannot pay Roman back and probably never will.
They are a suspended bankrupt club it's a ridiculous situation and Roman made the problem worse by taking advantage of the rules before the FFP came into effect.
The money that was thrown at the club during the time when the FFP rules were announced and when they came in should have a timeframe set up for when the club should pay the money back by.
It's like applying rules to stop wrong doing but allowing those who caused the problem in the first place to still compete at an unfair advantage.
Totally toothless rules.
"You would think City have a financial model similar to Arsenal looking at that."
The owners cleared it.
So Roman is refusing to clear our debt and Citys owners are?
I thought Roman was the best owner in the Prem
Oscar, im not sure you understand this, but its not like Roman has gone into Chelsea giving them a big £1bn cheque to spend. He has given them it over the time he has spent at the club.
How is this hard to understand?
comment by Chels Alouette (U17554) posted 45 seconds ago
So Roman is refusing to clear our debt and Citys owners are?
-----------------------------------------
Chelsea's debt is with Roman. So it really makes no difference if he wants to clear it or not. It only matters if he decides (for some inexplicable reason) to lost £1bil and walk off.
He can just clear it like the City owners have no?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
"So Roman is refusing to clear our debt and Citys owners are"
I'm reasonably certain whatever he's done is on the advice of a small army of tax accountants and lawyers and it's the best way to manage it for him and Chelsea.
Anyone thinking otherwise is just desperately seeking a feeble way to have a dig that has no merit.
comment by Chels Alouette (U17554) posted 28 seconds ago
He can just clear it like the City owners have no?
--------------------------------------------
Depends what you mean by clear. He can write it off and say he doesn't want it back. There is an issue here though because if he does that and then later down the line decides he wants to sell up, he will incur massive losses.
If he keeps it this way, if he does decide to sell, whoever takes over will have to pay him pack for what he put in.
Thats what I'm thinking.
So City owners have taken a different route and if they sell up now, they will make massive losses.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
"I thought Roman was the best owner in the Prem"
He is imo. He basically loans/gives his money to his club so that they can be competitive while hoping that he can see a return once they start making a profit.
The problem though is that Chelsea dont ever look like not spending and its not like they do moderate spending either
Roman will never get the majority of the money back but as someone already pointed out he probably couldn't care less he has got something for his money already.
comment by Chels Alouette (U17554) posted 1 minute ago
Thats what I'm thinking.
So City owners have taken a different route and if they sell up now, they will make massive losses.
---------------------------------------------------
If that is what City have done then yes. I think it would be fair to say that City would not sell for anywhere near the amount that the Arabs have invested in it.
"or abusing his power."
Hasnt he being doing that by firing all those managers & staff
Lucas,
Surely the City owners are the best since they are just writing/clearing off all the debt which Roman won't do in the risk of making massive losses.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Chels Alouette (U17554)
Yeah. Sorry, forgot about them for a moment.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Rap you were asking earlier how much Liverpool owed to other clubs and how much they were owed. Hold on I will find out for you.
@comment by Chels Alouette
keeping debt, clearing debt, etc has all sorts of tax implications and is probably impacted somehow by FFP.
I don't think it has anything to do with being a good or bad owner.
They're interest free loans - it's really irrelevant at the end of the day.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sign in if you want to comment
Financial Review of Football
Page 6 of 9
6 | 7 | 8 | 9
posted on 6/6/13
Wait.
How comes Citys net debt is so much lower than us???????
You would think City have a financial model similar to Arsenal looking at that.
posted on 6/6/13
Fact is that Chelsea cannot pay Roman back and probably never will.
They are a suspended bankrupt club it's a ridiculous situation and Roman made the problem worse by taking advantage of the rules before the FFP came into effect.
The money that was thrown at the club during the time when the FFP rules were announced and when they came in should have a timeframe set up for when the club should pay the money back by.
It's like applying rules to stop wrong doing but allowing those who caused the problem in the first place to still compete at an unfair advantage.
Totally toothless rules.
posted on 6/6/13
"You would think City have a financial model similar to Arsenal looking at that."
The owners cleared it.
posted on 6/6/13
So Roman is refusing to clear our debt and Citys owners are?
I thought Roman was the best owner in the Prem
posted on 6/6/13
Oscar, im not sure you understand this, but its not like Roman has gone into Chelsea giving them a big £1bn cheque to spend. He has given them it over the time he has spent at the club.
How is this hard to understand?
posted on 6/6/13
comment by Chels Alouette (U17554) posted 45 seconds ago
So Roman is refusing to clear our debt and Citys owners are?
-----------------------------------------
Chelsea's debt is with Roman. So it really makes no difference if he wants to clear it or not. It only matters if he decides (for some inexplicable reason) to lost £1bil and walk off.
posted on 6/6/13
He can just clear it like the City owners have no?
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/6/13
"So Roman is refusing to clear our debt and Citys owners are"
I'm reasonably certain whatever he's done is on the advice of a small army of tax accountants and lawyers and it's the best way to manage it for him and Chelsea.
Anyone thinking otherwise is just desperately seeking a feeble way to have a dig that has no merit.
posted on 6/6/13
comment by Chels Alouette (U17554) posted 28 seconds ago
He can just clear it like the City owners have no?
--------------------------------------------
Depends what you mean by clear. He can write it off and say he doesn't want it back. There is an issue here though because if he does that and then later down the line decides he wants to sell up, he will incur massive losses.
If he keeps it this way, if he does decide to sell, whoever takes over will have to pay him pack for what he put in.
posted on 6/6/13
Thats what I'm thinking.
So City owners have taken a different route and if they sell up now, they will make massive losses.
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/6/13
"I thought Roman was the best owner in the Prem"
He is imo. He basically loans/gives his money to his club so that they can be competitive while hoping that he can see a return once they start making a profit.
The problem though is that Chelsea dont ever look like not spending and its not like they do moderate spending either
posted on 6/6/13
Roman will never get the majority of the money back but as someone already pointed out he probably couldn't care less he has got something for his money already.
posted on 6/6/13
comment by Chels Alouette (U17554) posted 1 minute ago
Thats what I'm thinking.
So City owners have taken a different route and if they sell up now, they will make massive losses.
---------------------------------------------------
If that is what City have done then yes. I think it would be fair to say that City would not sell for anywhere near the amount that the Arabs have invested in it.
posted on 6/6/13
"or abusing his power."
Hasnt he being doing that by firing all those managers & staff
posted on 6/6/13
Lucas,
Surely the City owners are the best since they are just writing/clearing off all the debt which Roman won't do in the risk of making massive losses.
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/6/13
Chels Alouette (U17554)
Yeah. Sorry, forgot about them for a moment.
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/6/13
Rap you were asking earlier how much Liverpool owed to other clubs and how much they were owed. Hold on I will find out for you.
posted on 6/6/13
@comment by Chels Alouette
keeping debt, clearing debt, etc has all sorts of tax implications and is probably impacted somehow by FFP.
I don't think it has anything to do with being a good or bad owner.
They're interest free loans - it's really irrelevant at the end of the day.
posted on 6/6/13
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Page 6 of 9
6 | 7 | 8 | 9