06 Sep 2024 22:19:21
We don't know the situation, but if we had to choose Todd or Behdad Eghbali to have the running of Chelsea I think we'd all prefer Todd but more reports saying Todd will be bought out and eghbali stays, is there any factual knowledge you could give us ed002?

1.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 04:00:14
The shambles continues Todd B.

2.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 06:58:32
Classic international break story from the press. When you break it down, in my opinion, it's a nothing story.

Boehly and Eghbali / Clearlake don't agree on things but still have a professional relationship. Clearlake have no intention to sell their percentage, but would be keen to explore options when it comes to buying out Boehly. There's very little that's unusual or dramatic in all of that, but the press will be the press in how they report it.

3.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 07:34:35
“J” you are spot on mate. I can’t see anything unusual in what is “supposed” to be going on.

I’ve lost count of how many owners Utd have had over the years and if I remember correctly Liverpool and Villa have had changes of ownerships over the last ten years.

I get disappointed but not surprised that pundits and some fans use a regular business occurrence to some way reinforce there agenda. How on earth it can be referred to as a “shambles” is beyond me and I certainly don’t see the two guys involved as a good cop and a bad cop.

4.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 08:20:42
Chelsea FC is first and foremost, a business.

Over time, business partners have disagreements and fall out eventually paying ways with the dominant one taking over.

I did actually say this would happen to my wife at the time of purchase however we were in no position as a club to turn the offer down. JR came in far too late to be really considered As an option.

Just maybe this is part of the reason the SB project seems to have stalled, maybe ED002 can enlighten us further on this issue.

We can only wait to see how it plays out but because this story came through Bloomberg, there is more merit to it than the red tops, Sky and Talk Sport reporting it.

I can see us being in the media now until there is a resolution.

Also players don't help when they go on international duty and start talking about what's going wrong with the boards decision making. they should realise they are just players and not board members and that they get paid an obscene amount of money to pay for our club.

5.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 09:19:27
I can’t imagine players talking about this supposed issue.

If there is an issue I would have preferred it to remain in the boardroom. Just a little side note have a good reputation but in my opinion not as good as Reuters. They report one hell of a lot of financial news but as is often the case these stories only illustrates one side.

6.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 14:26:06
Who knows what's going on, but we have been saying on these boards for a while that all hasn't seemed well between them. No smoke without fire as they say.

My two fears are this is a story that won't go away, and that this will impact the players. Ultimately uncertainty at the top will trickle down so the sooner we get a resolution the better.

I have my personal opinions on who I would prefer but it's probably not worth sharing.

7.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 16:14:25
“Smoke without fire again. ” I have no idea if there has been disagreements between the shareholders but apparently it’s “civil war” when Chelsea are involved in boardroom power issues. Shareholders disagree in lots of organisations for lots of reasons.

I think I might prefer a 100% shareholder owner, only because it’s easier to have a single person/ organisation to criticise.

As “J” said, it must be an international break.

8.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 16:43:20
Tom, Bloomberg specialises in business and finance and I’m not sure what the other side of the story would be. If there are takeover issues it is an important issue for the club as it might determine the direction of the club in the future. Obviously, none of us know what is going on.

9.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 18:05:33
Tom

I agree, a single owner means that is a one vision whether it's a good one or a bad one.

10.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 19:37:23
Jimbo, I’m very well aware what Bloomberg specialises in. My point is it’s often the case that organisations like Bloomberg get a briefing from one side. This is generally done to satisfy an agenda. It’s not sinister behaviour it’s just happens a lot.
The direction of the club will be determined by the shareholders and its board representatives. I have zero idea if any group of Chelsea investors would be more beneficial than the other. If I remember correctly Clearlake own about 2/ 3rds of the shares.

11.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 20:35:12
Tom, if there are two sides then there must be an issue . As to who would be better to lead the direction of the club is another issue although TB’s early decision to make himself SD was incredulous. That said, the jury is out on the current SDs. I am not sure why we need two of them. Duos only work in music and comedy e. g Simon and Garfunkel or Laurel and Hardy, unfortunately they fall into the latter category.

12.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 20:53:59
Jimbo, as I’ve said there appears to be an issue. I have also said if there is an issue I would have preferred if stay within the boardroom.

As far as TD naming himself as SD in the early days of our new owners reign, yes it was a mistake in my opinion but it looks from the outside as if a lesson was learned.

I’m not sure why very successful business men would be compared to laurel and hardy. While I have no envy towards there successful careers, I do hope they make a success of there soccer investments.

{Ed002's Note - A huge amount of misinformation on the thread.}

13.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 22:32:01
Tom, I don’t know what business men have to do with Sporting Directors. To be fair to TB, he is a sports person and with others revived the fortunes of the LA Dodgers and redeveloped their stadium, so he does have a proven pedigree.

14.) 07 Sep 2024
07 Sep 2024 22:37:59
Tom, I was very fond of Laurel and Hardy- they should be flattered but can you explain why we need two SDs when most top clubs have one?

15.) 08 Sep 2024
08 Sep 2024 07:16:43
Jimbo, I have not conflated the role as a business person and a sporting director.

I was never convinced that TB had taken in the role as interim SD but if he did, as I clearly said, in my opinion it was a mistake.

I wasn’t aware we had “two” named SD’s. If we have I would assume they are each focusing on different footballing areas. What other club’s structures are, I wouldn’t have a clue.

I’m sure your like and comparison of them to Laurel and Hardy will be seen as just flattering.

16.) 08 Sep 2024
08 Sep 2024 08:15:37
Well there you go Tom. Looks like you were wrong and it is a big problem currently. Constant drama at chelsea nowadays.

17.) 08 Sep 2024
08 Sep 2024 08:25:33
I’m not sure what I’m wrong about this time.

I just don’t see it as a “drama” but maybe it supports some people’s narrative.

18.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 07:39:46
Be careful what you wish for Standard! Everything after "Roman" was going to be problematic due to PSR and EUAFA rules being put in place, meaning there was going to be a huge restructure due to those new guidelines/ rules.
Roman is gone (his like never to be seen again), but what he did in the sale process was ensure the future of our club with clauses that had to be met. Mistakes were made in the first window under TB/ Clearlake, which Ed002 clearly defined, and which were addressed in the following transfer windows leading us to where we are now.
Jimbo, every club has only one SD compared to our 2, maybe we are setting an example, and might be ahead of the 8 ball, change creates opportunity.
As for this so called "civil war" within our ownership, what a load of crap, sure there will be disagreements, quite normal between parties, but all of these "investors" are multi millionaires/ billionaires who will do what is necessary to ultimately make a buck. I have done business (on a much smaller scale I must say) with people I didn't like, but I trusted their integrity, and it's worked out fine. Business is business! As for the players, whether it be at ametuer, club, pub or professional level they all want to win, and I think the wage structure the club seems to be implementing (for team success) is bloody brilliant (enjoy you're time at Galatasary Viktor) no one is bigger than the team.
A team wins trophy's, not an individual, I like what I've seen so far this season (bar Servette) and I'm really looking forward to ongoing improvement under Maresca as a team.
My glass is half full!
As for this.

19.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 09:06:31
Brilliant post Kiwi.

20.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 13:41:52
Nice post kiwi, just not sure how we can reasonably say the earners 'learnt from early mistakes' and I don't see how they were addressed. We've gone into another season with a large, unbalanced squad. Not only that, we again, don't have a shirt sponsor and once again we don't have kep positions sorted (GK, CB, ST) .

21.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 14:04:56
Maybe the mistakes were some very poor signings and apparently not appointing a SD or SD’s early enough.

We have signed goalkeepers and we now have CH’s coming back from injury. I’m not sure the club could have done much more to have signed another striker.

We have sold loaned or released about 30 players but I’m not sure how many players have signed. The wage bill is apparently down from an average £200k per week to circa £70k per week. We are also close to a zero nett spend in the last window.

22.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 17:19:36
Tom, probably a good thing to bring the wage bill down but the reality is that if we wanted to sign say a top class striker or goalkeeper at their peak we would have to break the structure. I imagine our offer to Oshimen would have done so, if indeed, we made an offer. Yes we have signed keepers but have not addressed the keeper issue: none of those in the first team squad are top class and the others are youngsters. Interesting, that you are lauding the decrease in the wage bill, normally you position is that you don’t care about money, transfer fees etc.

23.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 17:41:52
Jimbo, I’m not lauding any increase or decrease in any monthly wage bill but as I have repeatedly said I am massively in favour of performance related pay. My position on transfer fees will always remain the same.

I have no idea what salary we offered Osimhen but whatever it was I would like to think that performance clauses would have been a significant part of any offer.

I have no way of knowing if Jorgensen is top class other than watching clips and a few club games but I don’t make decisions on players with haste. Anyway, I was responding to a remark that we hadn’t signed a goalkeeper when in “fact” we have.

24.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 18:21:03
Tom, Jorgensen is not a top class keeper: he may develop into one in the future At present he is second fiddle to Sanchez, who at best, is average. My point is that we haven’t addressed the keeper issue this season: which might cost us.

25.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 19:05:41
Jimbo, unlike you I have no idea if Jorgensen is a top class keeper today or whether he will be in the future. I did NOT say anything about him being a top class keeper. I repeat I responded to a comment about us NOT signing a keeper when in fact we have.

Your point about not addressing the “keeper issue” is based on your opinion of Jorgensen.

I seem to remember one of the Ed’s referring to Jorgensen as a keeper who is “highly regarded. ”

If fans and posters want to judge Jorgensen at this stage of his Chelsea career that’s up to them. I will judge him over time.

26.) 09 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 23:01:21
Tom as someone who doesn't care about money, as you have said repeatedly, you often do bring up this 'net spend'.

It's only a 'close to zero net spend' because of the amount of money we've already spent on the team. Net spent is completely irrelevant when taken out of context. Just a point, as I do agree we did some good in the window. Just concerned yet again that our squad is unbalanced for the third season in a row (abundance of wingers, one striker, two keepers that we don't know who's going to start, and 5cb, only 3cdm etc.

27.) 10 Sep 2024
09 Sep 2024 23:53:57
Standard, there are certainly some signings that I have found baffling but I’m not sure yet that the squad deserved to be referenced as “unbalanced. ”

I do quote the nett spend as I personally think it gives more balance to our transfer dealings. I’m not sure how many times I have posted about transfer fees but here we go again and please remember I have acknowledged this probably just me. “Transfer fees are important to the club but the fee is not MY concern on how I judge a players worth/ abilty. ”

Also mr reference to Nett spend being almost ar zero was specifically in the last window. For balance, I seem to remember our nett spend over the last five seasons is a lot more than any other premiership club. I’m only guessing but personally think that our nett spend over the next five years could be considerably less than our competitors.

We will only know later in the season if further progress has been achieved with the appointment of yet another new manager and the signings of several new players. I’m going to give them time before I’m critical.

{Ed001's Note - net spend is irrelevant as it is simply false. It is nowhere near the true costs of transfers. For starters, no one takes out the costs, such as the 5% to the player from each transfer fee and 5% to the clubs that developed a player at youth level. That is paid by the buying club but the selling club never receives it - so immediately you are overegging the income received by 10%, long before you get to taxes, agent fees etc. Again, they are coming out of what is received, not increasing the cost of purchase. And often a club will want the money sooner, so sell the debt to a 3rd party, who will charge a significant amount.

Then, on top of the cost of purchase, you still have taxes, fees etc but also, most initial down payments are paid for via a short-term loan, which requires repayment, along with their fees and interest.

Net spend is a completely false amount, way under the true cost of transfers. As I have kept saying for years, player transfers are the least efficient way to invest funds by a club. Infrastucture etc at least provides almost certain rewards, but transfer might never work out.}

28.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 05:02:22
Agree with everything you have said ed.

29.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 06:43:10
Ed, I agree completely. A transfer fee is not a true reflection of the total cost.

I also agree that any transfer is a gamble.

30.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 09:55:19
Excepting that a transfer fee is not a true reflection of a transfer cost but just to go back in time and just for fun, apparently the biggest net spenders in the history of football over the last “ten” years is Man Utd at a reported £1bn.

31.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 10:40:39
Yes tom, they have been shocking and have not had an ideology or good football plan in place. I'm sure you'd agree with that. Unfortunately unless someone acts, chelzea are destined for the same path. We lack identy, do not have a cohesive plan and have been making the same mistakes (all very similar to manchester united, though for them definitely worse)

32.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 11:35:35
I’ve never been a person/ football fan who understands the term “ideology, ” as it can mean so many different things to different people.

I would hope there was agreement on a BP and it would have been perfectly normal for the club not to make there BP public.

If I have a very limited concern it would be about the potential for yet another change of direction. I do not want another manager change, coaches change or sporting directors change.

To me it’s just a business disagreement that will probably end up in a business divorce. They happen all the time.

33.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 13:03:43
Tom, you are missing my point about Jorgensen, of course, no one can judge him either way because he is presently No 2 for PL games. As for the to do at board level, it will take its course. Yes businesses have divorces all the time; if there is a split there won’t be a reunion as per Liam and Noel; our owners don’t need the money.

34.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 13:35:10
It's all just complete naivety in my opinion tom. All of this mess was so easily preventable by simply utilising the incredible academy players and system we had at the club. We needed a few positions strengthened, and the rest could have been filled by existing squad players. For whatever reason though, we stripped everything off, literally everything, and started from scratch. To me it still doesn't make a lick of sense.

35.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 15:34:59
Standard, you or I may well have used more “academy” players initially to give themselves at the least some time but over a period of time I personally, with just a few exceptions didn’t have as much confidence in our academy players as a long term solution.

I would agree that a few of the signings such as KK, PEA, and Disasi were in my opinion mistakes. I’m also becoming more and more concerned about Mudryk but if I’m honest two of them are with the benefit of hindsight.

I have been critical at the pace our new owners went for a player overhaul but in my opinion it was overdue. The likes of Werner and Ziyech followed by Lukaku were generally awful at our club but they were bought by Roman so they are conveniently forgotten.

36.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 15:39:14
Jimbo, I’m sorry if I misjudged your post but your posts first sentence read “Jorgensen is not a top class keeper. ” So forgive my mistake.

37.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 18:08:58
Tom, Jorgensen is not a top class keeper as I said he might be in the future; he is unproven and at this stage is not no 1 choice. The point I made earlier is imo clear; the club didn’t invest in a proven top class keeper at his peak instead they brought in two young inexperienced keepers for the future. I was referring to the signings I believed we needed for this season.

38.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 19:49:02
Jimbo, now you have clarified your position I withdraw my apology as I obviously didn’t misunderstand your original post.

39.) 10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 22:13:19
Tom, obviously you did. Chelsea do not have a top class keeper. If you think we have, you are entitled to your opinion.

40.) 11 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024 22:33:51
We are all entitled to an opinion.

I have definitely NOT said Chelsea have a top class keeper. What I have said is I have only seen clips and few games and I will wait before making a judgement on the players ability. I have said this several times but for some strange reason you keep suggesting I have said the opposite.

41.) 12 Sep 2024
12 Sep 2024 07:38:43
Unfortunately buying a "ready made" keeper (Maignan, Costa) would blow our wage structure out of the water. As I said in another thread I think Slonina and Mender are the future our club is looking for. Slonina is killing it at Barnsley, and Mender (after his loan back) will be an amazing goalkeeping duo at Chelsea in the future.
Players must be aware of managers orchestrating moves for there own financial benefit ala Doniumura (spelling) to PSG on a "free", he'll be on great money in League 1 in France forever, but never tested against the best other than group stages in Champions League, a shame really.
Slonina with Mender as no 2 next year will be immense for Chelsea!