PieFacE Posted September 5 VT Supporter Share Posted September 5 1 hour ago, Genie said: Didn’t we sell our training ground to another Xia company? (maybe it was the stadium). NSWE sold the ground to themselves IIRC. We would be doing the exact same as Chelsea if we could. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 I dont so much mind the sale of hotels. The club owned them.and made whatever money they did from them. Now someone else owns them and makes money from them. It's a bit weird because I thought the hotels were basically players lodges, and I'd imagine they didn't pay to stay there. Maybe whoever bought them will now bill Chelsea a totally insignificant amount to have the use of them? Selling the womens club is a joke though. Spending on women's football is ignored from FFP calcs. So in theory they could just start up another one, spunk loads of money on it, then sell it on again. It's utterly bizarre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 45 minutes ago, PieFacE said: NSWE sold the ground to themselves IIRC. We would be doing the exact same as Chelsea if we could. I was thinking about what Xia did and it was to sell the naming rights for Bodymoor Heath to another of his companies (the point being we aren’t whiter than white in criticising what other clubs are doing). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 4 minutes ago, MrBlack said: I dont so much mind the sale of hotels. The club owned them.and made whatever money they did from them. Now someone else owns them and makes money from them. It's a bit weird because I thought the hotels were basically players lodges, and I'd imagine they didn't pay to stay there. Maybe whoever bought them will now bill Chelsea a totally insignificant amount to have the use of them? I think the issue is they aren’t really selling them, it’s a paperwork exercise between 2 businesses in the same group. If they’d have sold the hotel to Travel Inn then it would be more legit. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 42 minutes ago, Genie said: I think the issue is they aren’t really selling them, it’s a paperwork exercise between 2 businesses in the same group. If they’d have sold the hotel to Travel Inn then it would be more legit. Maybe, but that second businesses profits won't be reflected in the "Chelsea FC" business, I assume?.. .i.e they've lost whatever income they used to bring in, or sold on something they owned that was of value. i might be wrong on this. Either way, the women's football team is far more outrageous to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 1 minute ago, MrBlack said: Maybe, but that second businesses profits won't be reflected in the "Chelsea FC" business, I assume?.. .i.e they've lost whatever income they used to bring in, or sold on something they owned that was of value. i might be wrong on this. Either way, the women's football team is far more outrageous to me. I guess they needed an injection of a large amount of money quickly hence them “selling” the hotel. It’s all shady stuff, I agree on the women’s team, it’s another loophole which is probably going to get closed because of abuse like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 1 hour ago, MrBlack said: Maybe, but that second businesses profits won't be reflected in the "Chelsea FC" business, I assume?.. .i.e they've lost whatever income they used to bring in, or sold on something they owned that was of value. i might be wrong on this. Either way, the women's football team is far more outrageous to me. Yes, this is how I feel as well. The hotel transaction is blatant gaming of the system, but as you say they won't be able to record any revenue from them on their balance sheet now and they can only do it once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Yes, this is how I feel as well. The hotel transaction is blatant gaming of the system, but as you say they won't be able to record any revenue from them on their balance sheet now and they can only do it once. You underestimate Boehly . As part of the transaction Chelsea retained management rights for the hotels. So they still run the operation and book any profits. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post StefanAVFC Posted September 5 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted September 5 They’ve left Palmer out of their Conf League squad. Just mental. 1 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian_Angel_M Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 19 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: They’ve left Palmer out of their Conf League squad. Just mental. They need to get back into Champions League more than winning the Conference. Hopefully they achieve none 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 54 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: They’ve left Palmer out of their Conf League squad. Just mental. They should still qualify with ease without him and register him after Christmas 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oishiiniku_uk Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said: They’ve left Palmer out of their Conf League squad. Just mental. They must think there's enough quality amongst the other 78 players in the squad to carry them past Aventaklüh FC etc. The omitted players could come back in for the knockout stages, also. Here's hoping Chelsea somehow contrive a way to not qualify though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 1 hour ago, Zatman said: They should still qualify with ease without him and register him after Christmas It is still ludicrous though. If they are planning to bring him in later it means leaving out someone who got them to the knockouts which will be popular I’m sure. They are the poster for how to run a club in the worst possible way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osmark86 Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 If they can spend literal billions of pounds I'm not sure they have to be run competently. If you're wealthy enough you just fail upwards. **** this club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 They are spending £225,000 every week on Raheem Sterling’s wages whilst he plays for their rival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 (edited) 3 hours ago, StefanAVFC said: They’ve left Palmer out of their Conf League squad. Just mental. I can see the logic tbh, they're playing 8 games so should comfortably qualify when you see the quality they're facing and bit silly to risk him getting a long term injury in one of the games. We didn't need our full 11 out to get out of last season's group so makes sense to keep him fresh and have him out there for every prem game. Less travelling aswell. Edit: This is also a good way of integrating Sancho into their team by starting him in the Conference league in the void Palmer leaves. Edited September 5 by VillaChris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 Doesn't happen very often cos I play a lot of FM but FC noah from the Armenian premier division...nope never heard of them They don't need Palmer for these games, it actually makes a lot of sense unfortunately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 6 hours ago, Czarnikjak said: You underestimate Boehly . As part of the transaction Chelsea retained management rights for the hotels. So they still run the operation and book any profits. Ah yeah, that's true, I'd forgotten that. Still, I doubt it's much money, they look like shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuwabatake Sanjuro Posted September 6 Share Posted September 6 19 hours ago, Genie said: They are spending £225,000 every week on Raheem Sterling’s wages whilst he plays for their rival. I wouldn't consider Arsenal a rival for them, they are more in a the West Ham, Brighton, Man Utd upper mid table category now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted September 6 Share Posted September 6 17 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: Ah yeah, that's true, I'd forgotten that. Still, I doubt it's much money, they look like shit. Probably have the two upper floors permanently hired to random Saudi royals for £200,000 per floor per day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts