Abramovich & Chelsea + a bit of Everton

[BaZ87]

So is this Abramovich selling Chelsea to try and protect his wealth or is this Abramovich selling Chelsea because Putin's decided he wants some money and Abramovich doesn't like bullets?

There's two schools of thought in regards to why Abramovich bought Chelsea. One is that he purchased Chelsea as protection from Putin. Putin was going after a number of Oligarchs that made their money during the Yeltsin/rigged election era and by buying Chelsea he became a harder target - random Russian Oligarch dies and it gets a small article in a couple of broadsheets, Chelsea owner mysteriously dies and it's world news. The other is that he purchased Chelsea under orders from the Kremlin - this has been denied by RA and he's sued publishers of a book that claimed this.

Answering your question, I guess it's the same thing. His high profile status protected him from Putin but has made him a huge public target for sanctions. Selling Chelsea is as much to do with turning the club into cash as it is about lowering his profile, hoping that he can avoid sanctions further down the line. Like all Oligarchs, his money is Putins money if Putin wants it. The alternative is usually an unresolved death.

 

[BaZ87]

Hopefully this leads to reforms in the league.

What happens to Man City and PSG when their nations go to war.

https://caat.org.uk/homepage/stop-arming-saudi-arabia/the-war-on-yemens-civilians/

The UAE are supporting Saudi Arabia in their bombing of Yemeni civilians. Fortunately for Saudi and the UAE, the west doesn't care about Yemen so we're turning a blind eye. Who knows if or when that might change and it would explain why Amanda Staveley today stated that she was felt bad for Abramovich being forced into selling Chelsea.

 

[BaZ87]

I find myself more and more watching the Championship as that is what it used to be like.

Also Roman's money might be dodgy but it is just as dodgy as our owners who bought the club on debt and leech it dry.

Re the first sentence, you're actually just watching Utd Adam. They just play like a Championship side these days.

And you cannot be serious with that last sentence. While it might be difficult for football supporters to accept as we don't see ourselves as customers of a business, purchasing a business with debt is a perfectly legal and legitimate. While football clubs ideally shouldn't be allowed to be purchased with debt, it's a hell of a long way down the list on things football club owners shouldn't do or can't be in relation to your Abramovich's and Saudi states, who are using football clubs as political tools to launder their image.

 

[BaZ87]

Just catching up with this after a mad day with work. RA being sanctioned may lead to him ending up keeping the club - it now makes little to no sense for him to allow the sale to go through if the funds from the sale will now be seized so maybe he just sits on the club until the sanctions are lifted? **** knows what that will mean for Chelsea if that doesn't happen before the new season though. Even if Chelsea persuade the government to allow more exceptions, allowing them to sell tickets etc, their commercial revenue will tank with sponsors cutting ties with them.

Whatever happens, hopefully this is the wake up call we need in football regarding existing and future ownerships. Everton will, indirectly, take a battering from this and Arsenal could have very easily been in the same situation had the Usmanov/Kroenke battle played out differently - to think we had Arsenal supporters on here just last season hoping Usmanov would buyout Kroenke. If and when the West decide they don't need or want Arab oil or arms sales, Newcastle and City could be in the same situation in the future too. Allowing football clubs to be used as political tools has always been a recipe for disaster and that disaster's finally happened.

As for the questions re what Abramovich has done to deserve this. As if the way he earned and maintained his wealth wasn't enough, sanctions are being placed on all of those with close connections to Putin & the Kremlin in an attempt to squeeze them as hard as they can, forcing them to end their invasion of Ukraine.

 

[BaZ87]

Not a clue. I'd imagine that tickets for the next couple of games have already been sold so supporters will still be able to attend those games but beyond that, who knows. Maybe the PL will force Chelsea to give those tickets away free as they're required to offer 3k tickets to away supporters.

 

[BaZ87]

why didn't you just rtm to remove if they see fit instead of being a tit about it

You've never come across jonney before or you wouldn't be asking that question.

Your post was fine @Jean-F

 

[BaZ87]

You mean the government then, oh okay.

Didn't know about 20 years ago though right, right?

I don't understand this point. Why would it matter whether they knew about it 20 years ago or 10 years ago or 5 years ago? The UK have no jurisdiction over crimes Abramovich may or may not have committed in Russia. Abramovich hasn't been sanctioned because of these reported crimes either.

Sanctions have been placed on all (or at least a large number) of individuals and businesses that are connected to and support Putin and the Kremlin following their invasion of Ukraine. Abramovich has been sanctioned because he's been identified as somebody connected to Putin and the Kremlin. They've not only just decided this, it's been known for years. In 2018 following the Salisbury poisonings Abramovich's connections with Putin was raised in Parliament regarding potentially being sanctioned. The Salisbury poisonings weren't considered serious enough for the UK to hit Russia so hard and only a very small number of people (with military connections iinm) were sanctioned for that. Russia invading Ukraine is far more serious and that's why the UK and west as a whole have gone after almost everybody of note connected to Putin.

Your defense of Abramovich is another example of why the likes of him and certain Arab states have bought football clubs. You can commit any crimes and in RA's case, you can even admit to various crimes in court but if you spend a bit of money on transfers then you'll forever have an army of football supporters defending you to the hilt.

 

[BaZ87]

No one has provided any evidence of his links to Putin, it's all heresay and Chelsea derangement syndrome, if he had a day in court and they charged him then yes throw the book at him but to punish the club and the fans and say its about Ukraine whilst allowing Saudis to buy up clubs and not care about the situation in Yemen for the last 10 years isn't just hypocritical it's down right disgusting.

You can all jump on the bandwagon and change your twitter flags to Ukraine(because that will help) but I'm yet to see actual evidence that connects Roman to this war or to Putin.

So what you're saying is you'll only believe it once you have access to national intelligence?

Some years back, long before the full invasion of Ukraine, David Davis announced in parliament that Spanish intelligence believed that Abramovich was so close to Putin that he personally handled his finances. Chris Bryant revealed that from 2019 our national intelligence too had him down as a person of interested due to his links to Putin and the Kremlin. I assume you believe these are just outright lies?

As for punishing the club. Unfortunately that's a consequence of being owned by a Russian mobster. You benefited for years from Abramovich's ill-gotten gains and protection from the Russian state (he admitted both things in court before you ask for evidence) but now will suffer due to those links too. It's actually quite fitting. Chelsea were on the brink before RA flew in, not having the cash needed to pay your way and RA will depart with you in the same position. As I mentioned at the start of this thread, Chelsea won't be in an awful position moving forwards - thanks to your success bought with blood money, you're now a bigger club than you once were so even without RA pumping in an average of around £80m per season, you will still have finances to compete with the likes of Spurs and Arsenal. You just won't be able to spend the money that the biggest sides spend anymore.

Although it will apply to some, not everybody is simply jumping on the bandwagon. Many, myself included, have spoken out against the likes of City, PSG and now Newcastle's ownership. I've already mentioned Saudi bombing civilians in Yemen in this thread. Heck, rewind 18(?) years and you'll find Liverpool supporters protesting against the prospect of Thaksin Shinawatra's possible investment into Liverpool. A lot of people care about these things even if the likes of you think winning the FA Cup is more important than 1000s of people being slaughtered in Ukraine.

 

[BaZ87]

So what you're saying is you'll blindly believe a proven liar in the government without evidence of wrong doing?

Every owner of every club is dodgy so keep saying "Blood money" like a child but it means nothing.

All the people in here have turned a blind eye to all the atrocities of war in other countries for 70 years until you could jump on the Chelsea hate train, just update your Snapchat or Instagram with a Ukraine flag and do your part.

I'll still sing his name this weekend, loud and proud for all he did for the club.

I'm not sure who the proven liar is you're referring to however if you believe that a 2018 Spanish intelligence report and a 2019 UK intelligence report linked RA with Putin and the Kremlin because they hate Chelsea then that's some special kind of paranoia

I'm not sure why you object to me saying blood money. RA admitted in open court that many people (rivals of his) were murdered as part of the aluminum wars during the 90s, which he was involved in and made part of his fortune from. It was part of his defense in the Boris Berezovsky case - he admitted paying for political and physical protection because of the dangers of getting involved in that business. While others were dying around him, he was gobbling up more Russian assets. As for every owner is dodgy, that's obviously a load of nonsense but even if you believe some or many are, there's clearly different degrees of dodginess. I'm not aware of any crimes they've committed but owners like the Glazers are terrible for football however their loading of debt onto Utd pales into insignificance when you compare them to Abramovich or the Saudi's.

If you wish to continue to celebrate Abramovich then that's your right. If you believe Chelsea winning a few trophies is more important than all the crimes Abramovich has committed then so be it and others will judge you based on that. And before you again ask for evidence, when I say crimes I'm not simply referring to the many unresolved murders, suspicious deaths or kidnappings that RA is reported to be linked with but the crimes he's admitted to in open court - bribing his way into a position where he was able to essentially steal a large part of Russia's wealth. Millions of Russians living in poverty is a small price to pay for Chelsea being able to sign a few extra players though, right?

 

[BaZ87]

"Linked with" you sound like a proper nut, he's linked with therefore must be guilty and we should throw the book at him, not Putin but Abramovich.

Lots of English people live in poverty while we have shady people in our government let alone owning football clubs.

We are throwing the book at Putin. We're doing so by placing sanctions on him all those that prop him and the Kremlin up, including the man that personally handles Putin's finances.

As for the last sentence, can you link any other billionaire football club owners with causing mass poverty. There's a direct link with RA and Russian poverty - he stole Russia's wealth and then sold back a proportion of it to the state for billions some years later.

 

[BaZ87]

I'll take that as a no then.

 

[BaZ87]

Tbf, you were literally quoting somebody saying he was

 

[BaZ87]

Abramovich has no connections with Putin or the Kremlin, honest!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1508709771846770688

 

[BaZ87]

An opinion is proof?

You are taking the mick now, surely? The man is literally involved in talks between Russia and Ukraine. Even if you ignore the comment by the FT journo, what on earth is Abramovich doing there if, as you believe, he has no connection to the Kremlin? Has he gone full Gazza on us and there's a fishing rod and bucket of chicken out of shot that we can't see?

 

[BaZ87]

I don't believe he was but I also do not believe he has clear links to Putin.

Can you explain why he's been involved in these talks then, if he has no links to the Kremlin?

 

[BaZ87]

Because he is so high profile.

So being high profile is a reason for somebody to be involved in high level political talks? Maybe the next winners of Love Island should pop along to the next G7 summit?

I appreciate you've got yourself in a bit of a hole right now but you don't have to continue to dig and dig. Abramovich's links with Putin and the Kremlin are well documented and not a secret. Abramovich was actively (and openly) involved in Russian politics for close to a decade under Putin's rule (it's even claimed that Abramovich interviewed Putin as a potential successor to Yeltsin) and national intelligence agencies and investigative journalists have all found that he's remained close to Putin ever since he resigned from politics in 2008*. So when he's attending peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, it takes a special level of denial to refuse to accept that he has any links to Putin.

*You mentioned in another post how RA made his illegal fortune under Yeltsin - that's true, however the only Oligarch's that have kept their fortune/lives under Putin have been those that have fallen in line and done as they're told. Ones that don't die in mysterious circumstances.

 

[BaZ87]

The PL have confirmed that they've approved the sale of Chelsea to the Boehly consortium, subject to Government approval - this reportedly is pretty much agreed too so it's all but done now.

It shall be interesting to see how Chelsea operate moving forwards. Although Boehly is the face of the deal, he will only be a minority owner with Clearlake Capital, a private equity company, putting up most of the money. How does a private equity company make a return from a PL club that loses large sums of money in order to keep them at the top of the table. Short term they're going to have to put funds in to keep Chelsea competitive but moving forwards they're going to need to find a way of growing revenues significantly or being a lot smarter in the transfer market. Or they're just banking on another boom in TV revenues over the next 5-10 years and think club valuations will go through the roof again.

 

[BaZ87]

I think they'll push for the super league and possibly a personal TV deal with one of the streaming giants, they could save a lot of money by offloading all of the trash on insane wages.

Another Super League attempt will be years off now. Individual TV deals won't be happening either, certainly not anytime soon.

I was listening to Jim O'Neil, ex Utd director and Goldman Sachs banker who tried to buy Utd off the Glazers, discuss this on a podcast the other week and he was really struggling to see what all these US investors saw in Chelsea given the valuation and costs of sorting the stadium situation.

There's undoubtedly a feeling among US sports team owners that, given the global audience, the PL's TV and commercial revenue isn't what it could be and a big increase in TV revenues in 3 or 6 years time is the only way this deal makes sense. That mega tv deal is possible though. The NFL generate well over double per year what the PL does despite having only a fraction of the viewers. The key to the NFL deal is huge competition from very large tv networks with very deep pockets. At the moment we don't have that over here with Amazon only testing the water and BT pulling back a little in their battle with Sky. If Amazon step things up and or BT's new partnership with Discovery leading to them going big again then there's scope for a big rise in tv money in 3 years time.

 

[BaZ87]

The PL on its own has a far bigger audience, not football in its entirety.

And of course there will be belt tightening, you cannot continue to lose millions each year but Chelsea have to remain competitive or their value will drop, not increase. It will be an interesting balance for your new owners.