My biggest question is why are they spaffing so much on caicedo and lavia when they don't particularly seem to be what they are missing? That midfield needs some creativity.
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 13 minutes ago
My biggest question is why are they spaffing so much on caicedo and lavia when they don't particularly seem to be what they are missing? That midfield needs some creativity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The holding players will release the mote creative players to do their stuff.
Spent so much money and still look like they need a creator in midfield, and goals across the attacking line.
It's clear why they are buying potential players as well because they can then sell them down the line if they don't make the cut and potentially still make profit on them as long as they don't completely bomb.
Guys like Casadei, Gabriel, Fofana, Washington, Ugochukwu, Chukwuemeka, Santos, Madueke.
They just can't afford Mudryk or Caicedo to be a Cucurella or a Lukaku.
That's Datro Fofana.
The other one is close to joining Cucurella, Lukaku as being high priced disasters because he's so injury prone.
No, respectfully, first the squad needs to replace the gaps left by Kante , Kovatic & Jorginho.
Lavia,-Fernandez - Ciacedo- LFC
Nkunku, Mudryk, Sterling , Noni ect all represent the flair.
We need a another striker, which is being worked on, all likelihood, Vlahovic from Juve, for Lukaku + 35m.
I wrote something similar yesterday. Chelsea revenue outside Champions League is still over 400m and in Champions League close to 500m. Player sales go straight onto the books and with a decent academy, we are seemingly always able to sell a few players if we need to raise 50m here and there. Players like CHO, Broja, Chalobah etc, who have come through the ranks, would represent pure profit if sold.
I think the most precaurious thing is not whether we get Champions League this season but if these players on seven or eight year contracts don't work out. Look at Lukaku as an instance, 100m outlay and we are going to have to take a 70m hit just to get him off the books - that is not sustainable. Similar could be said of Cucurella if he does not improve. Also, if these players don't work out, we will be unable to make further signngs because we will fall foul of ffp.
https://twitter.com/CFCBlues_com/status/1691134426556649478
Yeah there you go, Jordan does some it up
Eric, yeah the long term implications of having players on such long contracts is another unknown.
Historically it doesnt work out.
But i think first its good to explain what the strategy is and that it is within the guidelines.
No doubt season by season it will be argued how precarious such a strategy is
comment by Eric_Draven (U20260)
posted 13 minutes ago
I wrote something similar yesterday. Chelsea revenue outside Champions League is still over 400m and in Champions League close to 500m. Player sales go straight onto the books and with a decent academy, we are seemingly always able to sell a few players if we need to raise 50m here and there. Players like CHO, Broja, Chalobah etc, who have come through the ranks, would represent pure profit if sold.
I think the most precaurious thing is not whether we get Champions League this season but if these players on seven or eight year contracts don't work out. Look at Lukaku as an instance, 100m outlay and we are going to have to take a 70m hit just to get him off the books - that is not sustainable. Similar could be said of Cucurella if he does not improve. Also, if these players don't work out, we will be unable to make further signngs because we will fall foul of ffp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lukaku was the previous ownership's mistake. The new owners are just trying to manage a difficult situation the best they can.
OP
In answer to your question of how are Chelsea doing it. Simple. They are cheating and circumnavigating FFP rules. They are obviously as well giving massive bungs to the incoming players. Why else would all of these players suddenly want to go to Chelsea, with no European football, small stadium etc, etc.
Absolutely needs investigating.
thank you Sandy, if nothing you are resolute in your obsessional dislike of CFc.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 13 minutes ago
My biggest question is why are they spaffing so much on caicedo and lavia when they don't particularly seem to be what they are missing? That midfield needs some creativity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The holding players will release the mote creative players to do their stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
essentially this, we saw enzo against liverpool, him, mudryk, madueke, jackson, nkunku when he's back, our full backs, more than enough creativity once caicedo is in.
1,000,000,000 pounds in two windows.
I think they'll crack top ten this year, maybe no Europe will help a bit.
This is it , when a football club is bought for 2.5 billion, with a commitment to invest another 1.75 billion.
The owners will honor their commitment & invest in there asset.
Don’t know why anyone even bothers answering this question.
The people who cluelessly b’tch about this stuff are going to b’tch about it no matter what they’re told. There’s no point wasting time explaining it to them.
comment by montleeds (U18330)
posted 18 minutes ago
1,000,000,000 pounds in two windows.
I think they'll crack top ten this year, maybe no Europe will help a bit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You spent about £300m to get relegated btw
They been talking about it on Talk Sport.
The consensus seems to be the spending will become an FFP breach, if Cfc do not generate income by the 24/25 season, by failing to achieving C/L status & the improved sponsorship revenue that accompanies playing in the competition
Also it is being considered that the club evaluate the breach as a risk worth taking.
Clearly there is a lot riding on this strategy for the owners.
But to be clear, this whole matter is consequence of the abysmal decision making in the first 12 months which culminated in the club loosing their C/L status.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 44 minutes ago
OP
In answer to your question of how are Chelsea doing it. Simple. They are cheating and circumnavigating FFP rules. They are obviously as well giving massive bungs to the incoming players. Why else would all of these players suddenly want to go to Chelsea, with no European football, small stadium etc, etc.
Absolutely needs investigating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I was you Sandy I would keep your mouth shut about Chelsea bunging players.
We were not done for it like Spurs in the 1994/1995 season, deducted 12 points and thrown out of FA cup.
Luckily for you the 12 points and FA cup ban were removed wrongly in my opinion but they upped the fine to over a million pounds from 600,000
So learn your own clubs history before you start throwing stones. I thought you were the Spurs expert , after all your supposed to be this 70 year old man.
And again if there is no rule in place when we started doing it re length of contracts, how can we be bending them?. You can bend a rule that is not in place. You and others supporters are just jealous that your board did not think of it, its genius.
Yet again Sandy your psychotic hatred of Chelsea has blinded you again.
And as per my last post , your wrong yet again.
How many more times are you going to make yourself look a bell 888 end
All of these accusations are conjecture in the end. If we have broken the rules, we will know in time. However, the owners have basically worked within the rules to spread payments and contracts out over a number of years. The profits from player sales appear on the books straight away - that's the way FIFA and Premier League rules work. They are not bending any rules as long as they work within the financial frameworks and restrictions stipulated. I understand the maths and it seems to me to be a high risk but legal strategy. But for those who are in doubt, Simon Jordan, who knows much more than we do can explain exactly how amorticized player purchases work, explains it perfectly - do a google search.
The key here is that Chelsea have a minimum revenue of 400 million a year outside the Champions League, they have sold over 200m of players which goes straight onto the books, and are paying around 140m a year for the players they have bought in over 5/7/8 years depending on the rules at the time of purchase and contracts given.
The biggest threat to this business plan is if these players don't work out in the long run and they have no resale value and we incur massive debts on them a la Lukaku. Then we'd be in trouble. But if Nkuku, Caicedo, Fernandez and a couple of others work well, the approach will ultimately be successful.
As yet no rules have been broken.
Are the new ownership operating with a careful prudent business strategy. No.
They are taking risk's investing and backing their club in a competitive industry, fair enough.
If the club get back into the C/L next season the risk will be seen as a risk worth taking.
If not, well every 10m over limit will be a 2m fine, at 100m we will be in Juve territory, facing the consequences of points deductions.
I agree the biggest threat is player fatigue.
But i suppose its not unreasonable to assume that these players are focused on a five year project and then moving on with a couple of years left on the contract.
Chelsea aren’t bending rules any longer - although UEFA did change their rules last season to combat these long amortisations. What Chelsea are doing is taking a bloody great risk - which as a Spurs fan I am massively in favour of as there is a very real chance it blows up in their faces.
It’s a dangerous strategy, you could be lumbered with players that don’t work out for nearly a decade as they won’t get as big a pay day as elsewhere. CL is a must as already stated and that’s far from certain.
More than anything else I just don’t see why Chelsea felt they needed to go down this route - Newcastle have spent wisely and are building up sensibly, Chelsea could have done similar and then gone big when it could be the difference between winning the title or not. For my money Chelsea are miles behind City - like everyone else and are still behind United and Liverpool - so all they are doing is buying a CL spot.
Finally, England will have 6 CL spots within 5 years, mark my words and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was 8 spots in a decade - the money being spent on mediocre players currently will demand it and UEFA will bend.
Well buying a C/L spot is a bit strong.
Unless it actually pans out on the pitch, nothing will be gained by this strategy.
Im certain when the Qataris do buy Utd, they will invest heavily, as will any group of investors spending billions.
Newcastle agreed to date have adopted a sensible strategy, but they are starting from a drastically different player equity base.
Combating amortizations ? im a little confused?
What is the issue with amortizations, clubs have been doing it for decades.
Cfc under Boehly did not invent the practice.
Agreed CFc are miles behind City and the current Afc squad.
But were not a millions miles away from the rest.
comment by Striketeam7 - There used to be a football club over there (U18109)
posted 59 minutes ago
Chelsea aren’t bending rules any longer - although UEFA did change their rules last season to combat these long amortisations. What Chelsea are doing is taking a bloody great risk - which as a Spurs fan I am massively in favour of as there is a very real chance it blows up in their faces.
It’s a dangerous strategy, you could be lumbered with players that don’t work out for nearly a decade as they won’t get as big a pay day as elsewhere. CL is a must as already stated and that’s far from certain.
More than anything else I just don’t see why Chelsea felt they needed to go down this route - Newcastle have spent wisely and are building up sensibly, Chelsea could have done similar and then gone big when it could be the difference between winning the title or not. For my money Chelsea are miles behind City - like everyone else and are still behind United and Liverpool - so all they are doing is buying a CL spot.
Finally, England will have 6 CL spots within 5 years, mark my words and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was 8 spots in a decade - the money being spent on mediocre players currently will demand it and UEFA will bend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Striketeam7 - There used to be a football club over there (U18109)
posted on 11/8/21
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by Striketeam7 - #WhatwouldFelix/Sandydo? - other than filter me (U18109)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
comment by KLS (U1695)
posted 2 minutes ago
Everton to win a trophy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are probably the only team going that underachieves more than we do - at some point something will click and they will get over the line - kind of like I hope it does with us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s more annoying is they have spent fortunes on players but haven’t won a trophy since 1995, have never played CL football, can’t remember the last time they even made a domestic cup final, are bang average year in year out and yet don’t kop for any of the flack we do about lack of silverware, underachieving etc. Us and Everton were level as clubs in the late 00’s, but since 2010 we’ve left them on our dust on and off the pitch - but they get such a free ride it’s unreal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly, I don’t understand it either, we are seen as the big under achievers and bottlers, yet Everton would kill to have the last quarter of a century we have had.
Their wage to revenue figures are amongst the highest in the league also at 84/85%, they are not very sustainable at all but the owner seems happy chucking more and more in but is constrained by FFP.
Some of their signings have been pure insanity - £50m on Siggy (purely football related at this point) £35m on Iwobi, £20m on Moise Kean, the other Keane, Klaasen, Sandro, Walcott, Gomes.
I bet they win another trophy before we do though, we just seem cursed. If West Ham won one again before we do then I am emigrating.
https://www.ja606.co.uk/comments/viewAllComments/436887
Sign in if you want to comment
How & why are Chelsea doing it?
Page 1 of 2
posted on 15/8/23
My biggest question is why are they spaffing so much on caicedo and lavia when they don't particularly seem to be what they are missing? That midfield needs some creativity.
posted on 15/8/23
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 13 minutes ago
My biggest question is why are they spaffing so much on caicedo and lavia when they don't particularly seem to be what they are missing? That midfield needs some creativity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The holding players will release the mote creative players to do their stuff.
posted on 15/8/23
Spent so much money and still look like they need a creator in midfield, and goals across the attacking line.
It's clear why they are buying potential players as well because they can then sell them down the line if they don't make the cut and potentially still make profit on them as long as they don't completely bomb.
Guys like Casadei, Gabriel, Fofana, Washington, Ugochukwu, Chukwuemeka, Santos, Madueke.
They just can't afford Mudryk or Caicedo to be a Cucurella or a Lukaku.
posted on 15/8/23
That's Datro Fofana.
The other one is close to joining Cucurella, Lukaku as being high priced disasters because he's so injury prone.
posted on 15/8/23
No, respectfully, first the squad needs to replace the gaps left by Kante , Kovatic & Jorginho.
Lavia,-Fernandez - Ciacedo- LFC
Nkunku, Mudryk, Sterling , Noni ect all represent the flair.
We need a another striker, which is being worked on, all likelihood, Vlahovic from Juve, for Lukaku + 35m.
posted on 15/8/23
I wrote something similar yesterday. Chelsea revenue outside Champions League is still over 400m and in Champions League close to 500m. Player sales go straight onto the books and with a decent academy, we are seemingly always able to sell a few players if we need to raise 50m here and there. Players like CHO, Broja, Chalobah etc, who have come through the ranks, would represent pure profit if sold.
I think the most precaurious thing is not whether we get Champions League this season but if these players on seven or eight year contracts don't work out. Look at Lukaku as an instance, 100m outlay and we are going to have to take a 70m hit just to get him off the books - that is not sustainable. Similar could be said of Cucurella if he does not improve. Also, if these players don't work out, we will be unable to make further signngs because we will fall foul of ffp.
posted on 15/8/23
https://twitter.com/CFCBlues_com/status/1691134426556649478
posted on 15/8/23
Yeah there you go, Jordan does some it up
posted on 15/8/23
Eric, yeah the long term implications of having players on such long contracts is another unknown.
Historically it doesnt work out.
But i think first its good to explain what the strategy is and that it is within the guidelines.
No doubt season by season it will be argued how precarious such a strategy is
posted on 15/8/23
comment by Eric_Draven (U20260)
posted 13 minutes ago
I wrote something similar yesterday. Chelsea revenue outside Champions League is still over 400m and in Champions League close to 500m. Player sales go straight onto the books and with a decent academy, we are seemingly always able to sell a few players if we need to raise 50m here and there. Players like CHO, Broja, Chalobah etc, who have come through the ranks, would represent pure profit if sold.
I think the most precaurious thing is not whether we get Champions League this season but if these players on seven or eight year contracts don't work out. Look at Lukaku as an instance, 100m outlay and we are going to have to take a 70m hit just to get him off the books - that is not sustainable. Similar could be said of Cucurella if he does not improve. Also, if these players don't work out, we will be unable to make further signngs because we will fall foul of ffp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lukaku was the previous ownership's mistake. The new owners are just trying to manage a difficult situation the best they can.
posted on 15/8/23
OP
In answer to your question of how are Chelsea doing it. Simple. They are cheating and circumnavigating FFP rules. They are obviously as well giving massive bungs to the incoming players. Why else would all of these players suddenly want to go to Chelsea, with no European football, small stadium etc, etc.
Absolutely needs investigating.
posted on 15/8/23
thank you Sandy, if nothing you are resolute in your obsessional dislike of CFc.
posted on 15/8/23
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 13 minutes ago
My biggest question is why are they spaffing so much on caicedo and lavia when they don't particularly seem to be what they are missing? That midfield needs some creativity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The holding players will release the mote creative players to do their stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
essentially this, we saw enzo against liverpool, him, mudryk, madueke, jackson, nkunku when he's back, our full backs, more than enough creativity once caicedo is in.
posted on 15/8/23
1,000,000,000 pounds in two windows.
I think they'll crack top ten this year, maybe no Europe will help a bit.
posted on 15/8/23
This is it , when a football club is bought for 2.5 billion, with a commitment to invest another 1.75 billion.
The owners will honor their commitment & invest in there asset.
posted on 15/8/23
Don’t know why anyone even bothers answering this question.
The people who cluelessly b’tch about this stuff are going to b’tch about it no matter what they’re told. There’s no point wasting time explaining it to them.
posted on 15/8/23
comment by montleeds (U18330)
posted 18 minutes ago
1,000,000,000 pounds in two windows.
I think they'll crack top ten this year, maybe no Europe will help a bit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You spent about £300m to get relegated btw
posted on 15/8/23
They been talking about it on Talk Sport.
The consensus seems to be the spending will become an FFP breach, if Cfc do not generate income by the 24/25 season, by failing to achieving C/L status & the improved sponsorship revenue that accompanies playing in the competition
Also it is being considered that the club evaluate the breach as a risk worth taking.
Clearly there is a lot riding on this strategy for the owners.
But to be clear, this whole matter is consequence of the abysmal decision making in the first 12 months which culminated in the club loosing their C/L status.
posted on 15/8/23
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 44 minutes ago
OP
In answer to your question of how are Chelsea doing it. Simple. They are cheating and circumnavigating FFP rules. They are obviously as well giving massive bungs to the incoming players. Why else would all of these players suddenly want to go to Chelsea, with no European football, small stadium etc, etc.
Absolutely needs investigating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I was you Sandy I would keep your mouth shut about Chelsea bunging players.
We were not done for it like Spurs in the 1994/1995 season, deducted 12 points and thrown out of FA cup.
Luckily for you the 12 points and FA cup ban were removed wrongly in my opinion but they upped the fine to over a million pounds from 600,000
So learn your own clubs history before you start throwing stones. I thought you were the Spurs expert , after all your supposed to be this 70 year old man.
And again if there is no rule in place when we started doing it re length of contracts, how can we be bending them?. You can bend a rule that is not in place. You and others supporters are just jealous that your board did not think of it, its genius.
Yet again Sandy your psychotic hatred of Chelsea has blinded you again.
And as per my last post , your wrong yet again.
How many more times are you going to make yourself look a bell 888 end
posted on 15/8/23
CANT bend a rule
posted on 15/8/23
All of these accusations are conjecture in the end. If we have broken the rules, we will know in time. However, the owners have basically worked within the rules to spread payments and contracts out over a number of years. The profits from player sales appear on the books straight away - that's the way FIFA and Premier League rules work. They are not bending any rules as long as they work within the financial frameworks and restrictions stipulated. I understand the maths and it seems to me to be a high risk but legal strategy. But for those who are in doubt, Simon Jordan, who knows much more than we do can explain exactly how amorticized player purchases work, explains it perfectly - do a google search.
The key here is that Chelsea have a minimum revenue of 400 million a year outside the Champions League, they have sold over 200m of players which goes straight onto the books, and are paying around 140m a year for the players they have bought in over 5/7/8 years depending on the rules at the time of purchase and contracts given.
The biggest threat to this business plan is if these players don't work out in the long run and they have no resale value and we incur massive debts on them a la Lukaku. Then we'd be in trouble. But if Nkuku, Caicedo, Fernandez and a couple of others work well, the approach will ultimately be successful.
posted on 15/8/23
As yet no rules have been broken.
Are the new ownership operating with a careful prudent business strategy. No.
They are taking risk's investing and backing their club in a competitive industry, fair enough.
If the club get back into the C/L next season the risk will be seen as a risk worth taking.
If not, well every 10m over limit will be a 2m fine, at 100m we will be in Juve territory, facing the consequences of points deductions.
I agree the biggest threat is player fatigue.
But i suppose its not unreasonable to assume that these players are focused on a five year project and then moving on with a couple of years left on the contract.
posted on 15/8/23
Chelsea aren’t bending rules any longer - although UEFA did change their rules last season to combat these long amortisations. What Chelsea are doing is taking a bloody great risk - which as a Spurs fan I am massively in favour of as there is a very real chance it blows up in their faces.
It’s a dangerous strategy, you could be lumbered with players that don’t work out for nearly a decade as they won’t get as big a pay day as elsewhere. CL is a must as already stated and that’s far from certain.
More than anything else I just don’t see why Chelsea felt they needed to go down this route - Newcastle have spent wisely and are building up sensibly, Chelsea could have done similar and then gone big when it could be the difference between winning the title or not. For my money Chelsea are miles behind City - like everyone else and are still behind United and Liverpool - so all they are doing is buying a CL spot.
Finally, England will have 6 CL spots within 5 years, mark my words and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was 8 spots in a decade - the money being spent on mediocre players currently will demand it and UEFA will bend.
posted on 15/8/23
Well buying a C/L spot is a bit strong.
Unless it actually pans out on the pitch, nothing will be gained by this strategy.
Im certain when the Qataris do buy Utd, they will invest heavily, as will any group of investors spending billions.
Newcastle agreed to date have adopted a sensible strategy, but they are starting from a drastically different player equity base.
Combating amortizations ? im a little confused?
What is the issue with amortizations, clubs have been doing it for decades.
Cfc under Boehly did not invent the practice.
Agreed CFc are miles behind City and the current Afc squad.
But were not a millions miles away from the rest.
posted on 15/8/23
comment by Striketeam7 - There used to be a football club over there (U18109)
posted 59 minutes ago
Chelsea aren’t bending rules any longer - although UEFA did change their rules last season to combat these long amortisations. What Chelsea are doing is taking a bloody great risk - which as a Spurs fan I am massively in favour of as there is a very real chance it blows up in their faces.
It’s a dangerous strategy, you could be lumbered with players that don’t work out for nearly a decade as they won’t get as big a pay day as elsewhere. CL is a must as already stated and that’s far from certain.
More than anything else I just don’t see why Chelsea felt they needed to go down this route - Newcastle have spent wisely and are building up sensibly, Chelsea could have done similar and then gone big when it could be the difference between winning the title or not. For my money Chelsea are miles behind City - like everyone else and are still behind United and Liverpool - so all they are doing is buying a CL spot.
Finally, England will have 6 CL spots within 5 years, mark my words and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it was 8 spots in a decade - the money being spent on mediocre players currently will demand it and UEFA will bend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Striketeam7 - There used to be a football club over there (U18109)
posted on 11/8/21
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by Striketeam7 - #WhatwouldFelix/Sandydo? - other than filter me (U18109)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
comment by KLS (U1695)
posted 2 minutes ago
Everton to win a trophy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are probably the only team going that underachieves more than we do - at some point something will click and they will get over the line - kind of like I hope it does with us
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s more annoying is they have spent fortunes on players but haven’t won a trophy since 1995, have never played CL football, can’t remember the last time they even made a domestic cup final, are bang average year in year out and yet don’t kop for any of the flack we do about lack of silverware, underachieving etc. Us and Everton were level as clubs in the late 00’s, but since 2010 we’ve left them on our dust on and off the pitch - but they get such a free ride it’s unreal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly, I don’t understand it either, we are seen as the big under achievers and bottlers, yet Everton would kill to have the last quarter of a century we have had.
Their wage to revenue figures are amongst the highest in the league also at 84/85%, they are not very sustainable at all but the owner seems happy chucking more and more in but is constrained by FFP.
Some of their signings have been pure insanity - £50m on Siggy (purely football related at this point) £35m on Iwobi, £20m on Moise Kean, the other Keane, Klaasen, Sandro, Walcott, Gomes.
I bet they win another trophy before we do though, we just seem cursed. If West Ham won one again before we do then I am emigrating.
https://www.ja606.co.uk/comments/viewAllComments/436887
Page 1 of 2