or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 183 comments are related to an article called:

Roman Speaks

Page 3 of 8

posted on 26/2/22

Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required

posted on 26/2/22

comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
How depressing that fans are looking at this through the lens of their club affiliation. Nickasaurus (to take one example) if you're asking for links about the source of Abramovich's wealth, it just shows that you have been absolutely lacking in curiosity for almost two decades while plenty of information has been in the public domain. He generously backed the FC, though. That's what matters. Aside from the provenance of his money, Abramovich has been an instrumental ally to Putin, the murderer and in turn a direct beneficiary of Putin's ever tighter and deadlier grip on power.

All the best to Chelsea FC but I hope Abramovich rots in jail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or like myself he has followed up on so many accusations before to find little to zero actual evidence of actual proof he asks for the instigator to provide the detail they have that caused them to make their claim.

Makes sense and saves everyone's time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If you're comfortable reading everything on his Wikipedia entry and venerating the guy, that's up to you. I guess the real world implications of his accumulation of wealth and the way he used his political influence seem quite abstract if you don't give a shiiiit about lives half a continent away. As someone with personal connections in the former Soviet Union, I can't put that aside and focus on the football.

comment by JFDI (U1657)

posted on 26/2/22

comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 14 seconds ago
You should look at our net downs the last 5/10 years fash. Our spending compared to city and Utd has been minimal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Always had the ability to go big though, really big and compete with the biggest clubs.

I’m reality that’s above Chelsea’s natural position without a guarantor there. As ever time will tell and you could well still be just as successful following the Liverpool model, this just signals how you operate changing.

The next owner could be a leech or could be a legitimate multi billionaire again. Much depends on that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are blissfully unaware of our creation aren't you?

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 3 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s not sustainable long term especially as the loan farm has to end with the rule change coming in

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
He can ask for his money back all he wants he won’t get it. He’s about to be sanctioned that’s why he’s making this pre-emptive move.

It’s not over but it’s over.

As for a great football club owner undoubtedly if you’re willing to ignore the source of the money but almost everyone in this country was to differing extents. Chelsea will never see this level of success again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Been solvent for the last few years having payed back all the money Roman invested, valued in the top 10 most valueable teams in the world year after year......think we'll be ok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Err, no idea where you got that idea, every source I’ve seen suggests you still owe him £1.5bn.

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But you wouldn’t have been able to operate like this now without the huge initial investment. Stop trying to make out that Chelsea are some kind of rags to riches fairy tale. It’s embarrassing.

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)

posted on 26/2/22

Asking for proof that Roman is a scuuuumbag

Why is he pretending to step down?

posted on 26/2/22

comment by TheSkins (U3865)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
He can ask for his money back all he wants he won’t get it. He’s about to be sanctioned that’s why he’s making this pre-emptive move.

It’s not over but it’s over.

As for a great football club owner undoubtedly if you’re willing to ignore the source of the money but almost everyone in this country was to differing extents. Chelsea will never see this level of success again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Been solvent for the last few years having payed back all the money Roman invested, valued in the top 10 most valueable teams in the world year after year......think we'll be ok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Err, no idea where you got that idea, every source I’ve seen suggests you still owe him £1.5bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erm seems you don't understand how a business works.......

We don't owe him anything - he owns us, and if he sells it will be for 10s of billions

Why do people struggle so much with this basic concept - and the fact is even at half price he would be making 4or 5 times what he originally invested, so again really have no problem with the situation

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But you wouldn’t have been able to operate like this now without the huge initial investment. Stop trying to make out that Chelsea are some kind of rags to riches fairy tale. It’s embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says a Pool fan

Anyone else not enjoying the irony?

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Ole dirty Baztard - penited and penandes (U19119)
posted 49 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 2 minutes ago
Soon be back where you belong, lower half of table and low attendances like before
About time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not likely. He’ll be pulling the strings behind the scenes, just not in name.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Very likely 👍

comment by Devil (U6522)

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 54 minutes ago

Soon be back where you belong, lower half of table and low attendances like before
About time
-------------------------------------------------------------
And still spanking Spurs whenever we played each other, as this is where Spurs belong

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But you wouldn’t have been able to operate like this now without the huge initial investment. Stop trying to make out that Chelsea are some kind of rags to riches fairy tale. It’s embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says a Pool fan

Anyone else not enjoying the irony?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deflection….

posted on 26/2/22

Can't wait to see a 'charitable foindation', make a donation of £180,000,000 to Dortmund in the Summer. 😅

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But you wouldn’t have been able to operate like this now without the huge initial investment. Stop trying to make out that Chelsea are some kind of rags to riches fairy tale. It’s embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says a Pool fan

Anyone else not enjoying the irony?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deflection….
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says the defelctor

Pool are only where they are cos the pools paid for them in the 70s and 80s. Where would they be without that?

It's funny cos you are trying to make a none issue an issue, doesn't matter where we would have been without invest we got it.....so unless you have a time machine your question is childish and a little silly.

Where would Pool be with the Pools? United without the huge Sky pay outs and then then glazers? City, Newcastle, Spurs, Arsenal all have big investors.

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by TheSkins (U3865)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
He can ask for his money back all he wants he won’t get it. He’s about to be sanctioned that’s why he’s making this pre-emptive move.

It’s not over but it’s over.

As for a great football club owner undoubtedly if you’re willing to ignore the source of the money but almost everyone in this country was to differing extents. Chelsea will never see this level of success again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Been solvent for the last few years having payed back all the money Roman invested, valued in the top 10 most valueable teams in the world year after year......think we'll be ok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Err, no idea where you got that idea, every source I’ve seen suggests you still owe him £1.5bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erm seems you don't understand how a business works.......

We don't owe him anything - he owns us, and if he sells it will be for 10s of billions

Why do people struggle so much with this basic concept - and the fact is even at half price he would be making 4or 5 times what he originally invested, so again really have no problem with the situation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can’t sell if his assets are frozen though, can’t invest either.

posted on 26/2/22

comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by TheSkins (U3865)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
He can ask for his money back all he wants he won’t get it. He’s about to be sanctioned that’s why he’s making this pre-emptive move.

It’s not over but it’s over.

As for a great football club owner undoubtedly if you’re willing to ignore the source of the money but almost everyone in this country was to differing extents. Chelsea will never see this level of success again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Been solvent for the last few years having payed back all the money Roman invested, valued in the top 10 most valueable teams in the world year after year......think we'll be ok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Err, no idea where you got that idea, every source I’ve seen suggests you still owe him £1.5bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erm seems you don't understand how a business works.......

We don't owe him anything - he owns us, and if he sells it will be for 10s of billions

Why do people struggle so much with this basic concept - and the fact is even at half price he would be making 4or 5 times what he originally invested, so again really have no problem with the situation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can’t sell if his assets are frozen though, can’t invest either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okkkk........

Still doesn't change the facts .......but thanks

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But you wouldn’t have been able to operate like this now without the huge initial investment. Stop trying to make out that Chelsea are some kind of rags to riches fairy tale. It’s embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says a Pool fan

Anyone else not enjoying the irony?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deflection….
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says the defelctor

Pool are only where they are cos the pools paid for them in the 70s and 80s. Where would they be without that?

It's funny cos you are trying to make a none issue an issue, doesn't matter where we would have been without invest we got it.....so unless you have a time machine your question is childish and a little silly.

Where would Pool be with the Pools? United without the huge Sky pay outs and then then glazers? City, Newcastle, Spurs, Arsenal all have big investors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This isn’t a comparison between Liverpool and Chelsea though, so I’m not deflecting anything. I was addressing someone’s post suggesting that Chelsea are somehow self sufficient.

Your whataboutery is nothing but deflection….

comment by RtM (U1097)

posted on 26/2/22

You can be self sufficient after an initial investment

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by TheSkins (U3865)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
He can ask for his money back all he wants he won’t get it. He’s about to be sanctioned that’s why he’s making this pre-emptive move.

It’s not over but it’s over.

As for a great football club owner undoubtedly if you’re willing to ignore the source of the money but almost everyone in this country was to differing extents. Chelsea will never see this level of success again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Been solvent for the last few years having payed back all the money Roman invested, valued in the top 10 most valueable teams in the world year after year......think we'll be ok
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Err, no idea where you got that idea, every source I’ve seen suggests you still owe him £1.5bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erm seems you don't understand how a business works.......

We don't owe him anything - he owns us, and if he sells it will be for 10s of billions

Why do people struggle so much with this basic concept - and the fact is even at half price he would be making 4or 5 times what he originally invested, so again really have no problem with the situation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was merely responding to you saying the club have paid him back.. which they haven’t.

But you really think that Mr Abramovic is just going to write off £1.5bn (or however much it is by then) if and when he sells Chelsea because he’d already be making enough money??? And you say I don’t know anything about how business works?

posted on 26/2/22

comment by RtM (U1097)
posted 1 minute ago
You can be self sufficient after an initial investment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes of course, but the initial statement of ‘no investment required’ is what I was referring to.

posted on 26/2/22

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 42 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 9 minutes ago
Not really. Lukaku for example was paid for all in sales, Tammy, zouma and a few others. No investment required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But you wouldn’t have been able to operate like this now without the huge initial investment. Stop trying to make out that Chelsea are some kind of rags to riches fairy tale. It’s embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Lol following me around. Bloody stalker

posted on 26/2/22

Anyway before we were rudely interrupted by terms nonsense

posted on 26/2/22

People are jumping to conclusions when reality is nobody on here knows a thing. Chelsea will be fine if Roman stays and fine if he doesn’t. Isn’t worth opposition fans worrying over I don’t think.

comment by Szoboss (U6997)

posted on 26/2/22

Abramovich brought his company from the state for a 1/6th of its (apparently conservative) market value. It’s largely accepted that Putin created extraordinary wealth for his supporters so that he himself didn’t need to get involved. It’s why many of the oligarchs have been sanctioned and more are likely. To think Abramovich is clean is an enormous act of faith or just plain denial.

However, Chelsea as a club aren’t under any threat as far as I can tell. Whatever the origins of the money, Chelsea have done nothing wrong. The club and the fans shouldn’t and won’t be punished for anything their owner may have done pre-purchasing them.

posted on 26/2/22

comment by RtM (U1097)
posted 6 minutes ago
You can be self sufficient after an initial investment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah was a ridiculous comment again from term. I never said we didn’t have an initial investment But that’s what you get with term I guess. Always spoiling for a fight

Page 3 of 8

Sign in if you want to comment