10 Sep 2024 15:50:14
It is being reported that CFC is in discussions about moving to Earls Court. I can't believe this is true as I seem to remember it being a definite NO from the sites owners.

1.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 16:35:07
Let's wait and see Tom, I really don't know what to believe any more.

I fear we are going to get different stories coming out to suit the individual owners agenda and until the ownership issue is resolved, it's best to forget anything in the media.

2.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 17:24:40
Bill, I’m less than convinced and part of me feels this is just noise from one side of the ownership tussle.

So far we have briefings on management style, support of Poch, a supposed 18 page dossier from the SD’s as to why Poch should be sacked, less reliance of young signings and now a potential away from Stamford Bridge.

My guess is more noise will be forthcoming.

3.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 16:24:01
Who is reporting this Tom? I expect Ed002 would know if true or not as usual.

{Ed002's Note - It is true it is an option that Chelsea has been forced to look at again.}

4.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 18:21:22
Totally agree Tom, it needs to be resolved quickly but my guess it will be a long messy business.

It would be interesting on what ED002 thinks of it all.

{Ed002's Note - The club are trying to address a problem.}

5.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 20:22:27
Can I ask what the problem is the club are having?

{Ed002's Note - it is unimportant.}

6.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 20:32:09
Further to Ed’s comments and for those who are interested, WAGNH have just come out with a decent prospective on the ground development debate.

7.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 19:43:44
Blimey Ed, that is a significant change. Thanks for info/ clarification.

8.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 04:03:06
We need to leave. Only option that makes sense feasibly. Spending 2billion for an extra 15k seats or whatever it was is ludicrous. We need a 60000 minimum imo.

9.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 08:28:35
The Earls Court has basically stalled yet another master plan is just about to be published.
Will CFC manage to convince all stakeholders ( that includes the CPO) that Earls C is a viable option? That is key but let’s be honest for a variety of reasons namely the site is ready and waiting, it would obviate the need to decant during a real build, much of the transport requirements are already in place and above all the clock for CFC is ticking fast in this matter.
I have always thought EC would be the perfect location.

10.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 09:27:49
As far as I know there has been no firm proposal to the CPO other than the norm.

{Ed002's Note - There is no "firm proposal" at this time.}

11.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 11:40:38
Thanks Ed. That explains why the only CPO letter I’ve had recently was to tell me that the share price is going up.

{Ed002's Note - There are options being considered although preference remains to rebuild on the existing site - but that is where the problem is.}

12.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 12:11:34
Thanks for the clarification Ed.

13.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 13:42:58
I believe thr only viable option would be to leave SB and if it's not EC them it needs to be further out.

Rebuilding SB would be far to costly.

14.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 18:01:09
Belated many thanks once more Ed002 for your insights on this.

15.) 11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 18:24:36
Looks like EC is mot out of the equation with the counciks giving support to the original planning application.

Back to the drawing board, I wonder if we have another site in the planning.

{Ed002's Note - These are I more than options being considered by the club. The plans already exist.}

16.) 12 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024 19:22:35
Thank you ED, much appreciated.

17.) 14 Sep 2024
12 Sep 2024 20:24:32
Is the issue still where to be relocated if SB was to be redeveloped?