Roman's Tax Returns - The Chelsea News Thread

Discussion in 'Chelsea' started by Ninjatend0, Jan 24, 2017.

  1. Crawleybus

    Crawleybus Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Hysteria.
     
  2. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Roman is a Portuguese citizen. I think we should ban all the Portuguese clubs?
     
  3. Boris10

    Boris10 Member

    Chelsea
    England
    Sep 25, 2019
    RE: singing Abramovich’s name

    I’m torn on this. For me it’s not about differentiating the club from the owner - the government’s response is already an illogical mismatch of populist nonsense and many fans are grateful to the person who transformed our club from the edge of occasional contention for minor prizes to serial winner.

    I’d like to see the government demonstrate the new intelligence they claim to have just recently coincidentally developed connecting Abramovich to Putin, beyond Abramovich being an intermediary between the old Russian establishment and Putin’s rise to power 25 years ago, or Abramovich being a minor politician for a few years out in the wilderness.

    This government is - always - more concerned with being seen as impactful, moral, and influential than actually doing anything. We see this on literally every single subject in British politics over the last three years.

    • Cost of energy crisis? Have a tiny loan that’s paid back via your bills or a price cap that we just increase when energy firms want to raise prices.
    • Brexit referendum? Yeah we’ll have one but not think about the actual implementation of the result until afterwards
    • Brexit negotiations? Oven-ready deal! What’s that? Good Friday Agreement? Ah, I’m sure it’ll be fine
    • Russian influence? We’ll write a report (but never publish it)!
    • Health service and police personnel numbers? Sure, we’ll hire 20,000 police (having gotten rid of more than that in the first place) and hire 50,000 nurses (if you count retaining 30,000 nurses as hiring new ones) and build 40 new hospitals (if you count refurbishing old ones as building new ones)
    • we could go on…

    The point behind noting these examples is that nothing that they do is about doing anything. We’re still committed to multiple billions of pounds in oil purchases from Russia. We still have literally the son of a KGB man in the upper chamber of Parliament, who likely has serious kompromat on the PM, and who publishes a national newspaper. We still make it incredibly difficult for Ukrainians to get to Britain (3,000 visas issued and counting) while allowing much poorer countries to take in more than a million refugees. But LOOK! Look at the shiny Abramovich-shaped thing that is an easy target, whose name people know, and who is directly linked to an organisation that’s highly visible.

    Even with the freezing of Abramovich’s assets, they’re half arsed. We should be frozen, inactive, not operating.

    I sincerely believe that the reason it took them so long is that they were deciding how they could carve out a path where they could be seen to be disrupting his assets but knew that people would think that actually mothballing the club would be seen as going too far. Right now they have a huge number of opposition fans welcoming the possible demise of the club without anyone yet having to deal with that as a realistic outcome.

    If - as the mad witch Dorries claims - they want to ‘protect the club, its fans, and the national game’, the club could be given license to operate as normal with outgoing funds scrutinised to ensure no capital flight to Abramovich, all incoming funds restricted to footballing operations, and any new contracts to existing players to have a caveat regarding transfer of ownership of the club within x days. I expect amendments to the licence if and when our cash reserves are depleted to the point of not being able to pay wages anyway.


    So yeah. I’m not against freezing the assets of oligarchs. But I am against this populist bullshit that is neither one thing nor the other.
     
  4. Boris10

    Boris10 Member

    Chelsea
    England
    Sep 25, 2019
    Interesting that we’ve continued to use the same shirts, and that 3 branding is still visible around the ground. With limited cash on hand maybe the club has decided to say piss off to 3. Maybe receiving new shirts from Nike without the sponsor would be considered a transaction with financial worth. Maybe Nike couldn’t make them quickly enough.

    Stick them in generic Nike teamwear for all I care.
     
  5. Boris10

    Boris10 Member

    Chelsea
    England
    Sep 25, 2019
    The thing about Chris Philp is that he’s just a liar. Like Gove, like Johnson, like Dorries. I’m moderately anonymous on the internet but if any lawyers representing any of those people want to challenge me on that, I’m more than happy to put my money where my mouth is.
     
  6. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I agree with most of that but I do think we need, as supporters, to stick to a story.

    I saw a fella being interviewed outside the ground and he was saying it's unfair to punish us, as fans when it's nothing to do with us but the thing is, you can't then start singing the name of the fella whose actions have put us in this position. Y'know, we need to stick to a line.

    Of course, as you say, that doesn't explain the other reason why we're in this position. The ludicrous posturing of the tories.
     
  7. Boris10

    Boris10 Member

    Chelsea
    England
    Sep 25, 2019
    Yeah, I can see that, too. Individuals should be consistent but we’re not a monolith. We also perhaps should accept that despite the romanticism of professional sports, we aren’t the club but the customers of the club. It’s only the cultural position of football in the national psyche that means we’re operating at all.
     
  8. Boris10

    Boris10 Member

    Chelsea
    England
    Sep 25, 2019
    I think it’s also relevant that most football supporters, like most people generally, are not that engaged in the detail of things. Everything’s mostly self interest and tribalism and sensational headlines.
     
  9. Kerry Dixon's Boots

    Staff Member

    Jun 6, 2006
    77 degrees
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Most people never read past a headline and newspapers know it (as many as 60-80% depending on what studies you read).

    Stick all of that annoying material that contradicts the headline in paragraph 7 and all is well.
     
    Boris10 repped this.
  10. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    There was some talk about that elsewhere. For me, football is both a business AND a community and social 'factor'. That's what's so dreadful about the mishandling by the tories. They make platitudes about recognising the importance of the club to the community, both around the ground and in wider UK society, and then completely screw up the handling of it.

    The only logical thing to do would be to bring in someone to handle the sale and manage the club and accept, at least on a short term basis, some basic debts to allow the club to function.

    As things stand, it's almost as if the club, as a business, is effectively insolvent as it can't pay it's debts in the sense that it can't do anything without the governments say-so. Even the 'special license' is different to what would normally happen in that respect.

    But, having made the decision to do that then they have to take the next step and protect the interests of the 'creditors' of the business, whether it's the Ukrainian state, (if that's what they decide), or something/someone else.

    Leaving aside the business and it's employees, (some hundreds as I understand it), they also have a responsibility to the wider football 'culture'.
     
    Boris10 repped this.
  11. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    #1486 StamfordBridgeLions, Mar 14, 2022
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2022
    The sale is being handled by American bank the Raine Group. But you're suggesting big government handle the sale? Yep. Some common sense has to prevail here. Some intelligent grown ups have to make the appropriate decisions. The current sanctions against Roman last until May 31st.

    Meanwhile, on Saturday, the Saudi owners of Newcastle . . .executed 81 people convicted of crimes ranging from killings to belonging to militant groups, the largest known mass execution carried out in the kingdom in its modern history. They did give them secret trials (and a little torture) beforehand. Some were executed for holding 'deviant beliefs'.

    Human rights abuses and club ownership. Time for a proper investigation.
     
  12. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    #1487 StamfordBridgeLions, Mar 14, 2022
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2022
    Friday deadline. . .it is understood the Government are open to allowing a sale to go through, so long as no funds go to Abramovich.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/fo...m_campaign=breaking-news-ticker&itm_content=4

    Sir Martin Broughton is interested, as well as Nick Candy, Some Americans and of course a Saudi consortium. Sir Martin is a Chelsea fan, as is Nick, and Martin did a fine job as Chairman of Liverpool.


    “There’s a real need to change everyone’s mindset. There’s too much emphasis on Roman as the legal owner and not enough on the Ukrainian victims — who to all intents and purposes are the beneficial owners — and the fans who are the emotional owners.”

    “[Sponsors need] to stop thinking about their brand being contaminated by Roman and start thinking about how they can enhance their brand by supporting the Ukrainian victims, and how they can strengthen their emotional bond with the fans”.

    “Most of all, the government must prevent the club going into administration. That would destroy at least £500m value, which means £500m less going to the victims of the war. Surely, after all the brilliant efforts of the British public in raising some £200m in donations, no government wants that on their hands as an unintended consequence of their actions.”

    -Sir Martin Broughton; source: Sky News
     
    Dr_Intoxicated, Boris10 and billmead repped this.
  13. Boris10

    Boris10 Member

    Chelsea
    England
    Sep 25, 2019
    I don’t know where the idea of the sale value going to Ukraine has come from, other than Abramovich’s statement about ‘all victims of the war’. I highly doubt the UK govt would do anything other than stick into the general fund.
     
  14. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    That would be the tories intention, obviously but they'll be under enormous pressure to divvy up at least some of it to some worthy cause related to Ukraine.

    But, also, I thought some tory said they'd give the money to the Ukrainians at some point. Might be wrong about that though.
     
  15. Kerry Dixon's Boots

    Staff Member

    Jun 6, 2006
    77 degrees
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I see the club called for and then retracted a request to play the fa cup match at Boro behind closed doors.

    Extremely tone deaf imo and not well judged. Public sentiment is hugely against the club and this was a misstep.

    Also, if they have an allocation is there a reason they couldnt give them away as a gesture?

    Steve Gibson had some rather choice words about bruce buck over the whole affair. Not that he himself isn't still extremely bitter about losing the 1997 cup final and 1998 league cup final before getting relegated after his own attempt to buy silverware (barmby, ravenelli, juninho, emerson etc) failed.
     
    Boris10 repped this.
  16. limpidrock

    limpidrock Member

    Mar 19, 2008
    I think they're barred from giving away tickets, seeing as how they couldn't give away the tickets to the Peter Bonetti memorial.
     
  17. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    #1492 StamfordBridgeLions, Mar 16, 2022
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2022
    And here we are. Confusion. Scapegoating. And just general media hatred for Chelsea. Lots of talk about morals and ethics of ownership. And not a lot of clarity. Casting of stones, folks in glass houses, etc. The absurdity of applying morals to billionaires.

    To re-cap. The Government are not selling the club. A merchant bank in the United States is selling the club on behalf of the owner. The owner - and we dare not speak his name - will look at the proposals. The proposals are being summarised and presented to the owner who we are assured wants the best for the club. The owner gets to make the decision. Offers are in for a deadline on Friday. Sancations are in place until May 31. There is a very good chance that the offers will not be good enough. That is put together in a hurried way that means that these bids will fail and everything will enter another round. Fools rush in, where billionaires take a break [or something]. Or maybe a deal can be reached, but the sanctions will remain for the new owners. Sanctions will continue with the new owner/s.

    In other news, operating costs are high. . .Tuchel said travel needs were centred around players avoiding possible soft-tissue injuries during a busy schedule rather than "luxury and bling bling".

    I just would like to say Tuchel saying "bling-bling" was pretty cool.
     
  18. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Ricketts in for Chelsea
    https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/60766823
    Chicago Cubs owners and Citadel's Griffin team up for Chelsea bid

    Lots of vitamin C and calcium should do the trick.

    Griffin is estimated to be worth over $26bn by Forbes - more than any other reported interested individual - though has never been involved in sports investment before.
     
  19. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Yeah, that was my understanding as well, (although not sure about the PB memorial stuff),. We shouldn't have tried to get the Middlesborough game played behind closed doors. That was bloody daft.

    By all means say it's unfair on the fans who haven't done anything wrong but to say that their fans, (who also are blameless), should suffer, was bloody ridiculous.
     
    MattR and limpidrock repped this.
  20. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    We should play the game behind an electric fence perhaps?
    [Chelsea FC has a long history of stupid ownership].
     
  21. StamfordBridgeLions

    Chelsea FC
    Sep 4, 2016
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    #1496 StamfordBridgeLions, Mar 17, 2022
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2022
    Interesting way to report the news. . .

    " Lord Coe has joined the consortium led by ex-Liverpool chairman Sir Martin Broughton to buy the club" - He cannot be too bad if he is an ex-Liverpool chairman? Do folks not remember that story? where a loyal Chelsea fan Sir Martin had to help sort out the complete mess in Liverpool FC?

    Sebastian and Martin both long-term Chelsea fans of the British establishment. Above reproach? Maybe. Innocent? Well . . .most unlikely. But the perception in PR terms is a good one.

    Gianluca Vialli said he is working with Nick Candy on his bid.

    D-day tomorrow. imho it will be one of these British bids. Roman won't sell to arabs and normally yanks would be fine, but this PR nightmare we are currently in can only be resolved with Lord and Sir. A stiff upper-lip. A thin red line.

    We shall see soon enough.
     
    limpidrock repped this.
  22. Kerry Dixon's Boots

    Staff Member

    Jun 6, 2006
    77 degrees
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    If anyone has a good article that lays out what happens from here please feel free to share it. Most of what I read is about the latest bids and who is involved.

    I understand there is a deadline for bids of tomorrow (friday) and that explains the current flurry of news.

    In my work world a bid process would involve reviewing the bids, cutting down to a manageable number (say 3) and then have a more detailed review including some sort of finalist meeting where the bidders are asked to present to the decision makers.

    Not sure if that is what happens here but if so, provided the government actually want to remove the club from Abramovich we should see a decision relatively quickly despite the complexity.

    Hopefully the winner is not overpaying or over leveraging, is not from the world of far right/left politics and is willing to step up the level of fan representation. Some groups accommodate all, others none, of this criteria.

    Will be a busy few days!
     
    limpidrock repped this.
  23. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Haven't they already done that? I mean, they're the government... they make the law and if they deem that they now own the shares that Abramovich owned and any money he was owed back by the club, they can pass a law making it so and there's not much anyone can do about it other than take them to court and, who controls the courts? They do on account of them being the government and all.

    As I understand it, atm, they haven't done that... they've simply applied sanctions which means RA can't benefit from the assets or get loans paid back but they could do. That's why they've said that any offers should be made to the UK government.

    So I think, if push comes to shove, it doesn't matter what he thinks about it. If they decide to sell it to a specific organisation, it gets sold.
     
  24. Kerry Dixon's Boots

    Staff Member

    Jun 6, 2006
    77 degrees
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    If that were truly the case we wouldn't be looking into megabus fares to away games.

    I'm talking about fully and finally separating the club from the owner and for that the government need to support rather than block any sale. Unless of course they want to specifically punish the team in which case they will make things as difficult as possible.

    As to whether he has no formal role, it wouldn't surprise me if he has a bat line into raine group.

    So no i honestly dont think the club is entirely independent of roman in reality or in perception at this time. The only way that happens is when a new owner gets the keys.
     
  25. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Well, that's why I say 'If push comes to shove'. I'm guessing atm he's being allowed to have some input. my point was that's only because he's allowed to have an input.

    As to the reason for fans being jerked around, isn't that simply because the tories are as incompetent in this the same way they are with everything else? :D
     
    Dr_Intoxicated repped this.

Share This Page