Now it's being said that it is a big risk that the sale of Chelsea will not be resolved by the end of the month and could become insolvent. I always said it wasn't as easy as they would like to have suggested. Abramovich, it's coming to fruit that the 'charity' is not all that it seemed....I'm shocked I am, really really shocked by this revelation, not!
Yup, they have to be able to prove that they can compete in next seasons competition and time is now fast running out. Licence ends the end of this month I believe. Some will suggest the government could extend it, but what exactly are they going to extend, Abramovich has proven he is not the charitable person that he claimed to be, and anyone that believed him is a fool. Also this will put pressure on the gangster to make an immediate decision to stop it all collapsing like a pack of cards.
Oh dear oh dear, things not looking good... Whitehall insiders have said there are fears of Chelsea going out of business.
They won't go bust - there's brinksmanship going on here. Probable outcome is that Abramovich's £1.6bn will be put in a legal trust, and Chelsea will carry on. They're now officially in next year's CL, so that adds to the value. They're literally too big and too influential to fail. Go back to 2010 and our situation. RBS, who held all the cards, just wouldn't let Liverpool go under and into administration so sold it for half its then booked value (Forbes) in a distressed sale, because that covered the debts owed to them by Hicks and Gillette - **** all the other debtors H&G had. But that was because we were talking hundreds of millions back then: now it's billions. So "**** you Bury, with your £5m or so - you can be wound up and your brand go to the wall. Liverpool or Chelsea? No way can we let clubs with their brand value and worldwide recognition fail - just get another venture capitalist in who can borrow some money off us to pay off the former's debts, and it's trebles all round". The way to deal with Chelsea (and Everton and City, but that's another story) is to crack down on the financial chicanery that allowed them to run up such debts/loans and actually apply FFP both domestically and in European competitions. Won't happen though.
I think this situation is way different to any other that has been faced by a club before. For starters from the very beginning there seemed to be a real lack of understanding of what sanctions actually meant, and people thought they could play around with the rules. I've virtually called Abramovich out at the very beginning what he would try and do, and he has not disappointed. Now it is being seen for what it really is a complete sham, I wouldn't be quite so quick if I were a supporter in dismissing Chelsea actually going under, afterall their real value at this precise moment time is zilch. Everything is completely worthless, kaput, zero. RIP Chelsea FC.
I hope you're right. They should NEVER have been allowed to convert their debt into a loan from Roman in the first place. It was just simply a device to get around FFP. FFP is a joke, for sure, but now we know that technically it easy to circumvent by this technique. But it's now come back to bite them in the arse. I do, however, think they'll just not let Chelsea go under - there's billions in it for banks and speculators. As said, **** Bury, apparently - nobody in Des Moines or Bangok has heard of them, let alone wants to buy their replica shirts.
The only thing going in Chelsea's favour at the moment has to be the dollar, the pound has to be lowest against it that I have ever seen. So I suppose to the Americans it's like a bric a brac sale. I've heard Boris is also going to delay the ban on buy one get one free at the moment, so this might help out.
Insolvent means? Go into Administration? Drop ten points off next season as a penalty. Probably keep them out of Europe the following season, but even with moderate player sales, they're still good enough to stay up even with a 10 point drop and a few players sold.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea-takeover-risk-collapse-alarm-26979925 Another vital deadline is the first week of June, when the Premier League will meet to finalise the composition and regulations of next season. If Chelsea do not have new owners by then they face being kicked out of the the top tier. Ouch!
A route back to Champions League for Arsenal. Bet government extends the deadline for Chelsea. Can't see them letting it collapse.
Again, we can dream, but if this is City, United, Chelsea, or, yes, Liverpool, rules will be bent and enough clubs out of the 20 bought off to allow a top 6 team some leeway. Let's be honest though, if it's a Norwich or a Burnley or a Hull, say, they can **** off to the 2nd division. I mean the Prem has been sitting on a bombshell report on City for two years now, scared to act because of their lawyers and PR machine. They know what happened when the CAS was got at - and people forget, conspiracy theories aside, that City never 'got off' with those UEFA allegations - they were deemed to be out of statute for time reasons: that statute doesn't apply to Prem rules. The point is Chelsea has access to just as much power and influence as City, even without Abramovich, simply because they are worth so many more billions as long as they can be kept unpunished and in the Prem. And money talks.
Not going to happen... Chelsea won't be disbanded or kicked out of PL... But if it did happen what do the rules state: Would only two teams get relegated, or would four get promoted?
Yeah, I asked that a couple of weeks ago when it looked like Everton could still finish 17th (they won't now). Being mischievous, obviously, as presumably the decision, if it isn't written down already, will be taken by the 20 (19)? Prem teams in situ in June of this year. Just can't see them voting for Leeds or Burnley to go down in 17th place just so both Huddersfield and Sheff U can come up. But if anybody knows of Prem rules otherwise, I'm willing to listen.
Other question is:. Would anyone want Chelsea kicked out because of this? Don't get me wrong, I would think it funny if they got relegated because they had a bad season, but to get relegated because their assets were frozen is horrible and wouldn't wish that on any club
They are not Chelsea's assets, they are Roman's assets, the proceeds of a gangster who is sanctioned. They didn't win any of their trophies, they bought them, every single one of them. It's as bad as voting Tory type of corruption, actually most Chelsea supporters probably are Tory. Throw them in the pit and feed them to the lions I say.
