I think your purchase price of £2.5bn is probably a £1bn to 1.5bn mark down on the proper value at the time due to the forced sale and debt, which is why your new owners were prepared to make the commitment to invest.

I have always thought that commitment to invest as hollow because ultimately £1bn spent on the squad does not come from their pockets. Its not allowed to. It come from the clubs revenues in the end, even if the money is fronted by the ownership.

Same for a stadium. They may well spend £1bn making that happen but it will be in the form of loans, not straight out of their pocket.

The strategy as you described was flawed as it was devised by businessmen with little footballing acumen. Buy lots of talented youngsters, give them big contracts and this will deliver success.

There are so many subtleties when dealing with footballers. Its not like bringing in a new CEO, based on their top reputation, paying them loads and they get the job done. Footballers can be a success or a failure. Give a 21 year old a massive deal worth 10s of millions until he's 29, how motivated is he going to be. Some will naturally be total driven professionals, others may not. Teams have to be very carefully constructed and character counts for a lot, as Spurs are seeing right now. Failing to understand this and leaving Todd to run around playing fantasy football , paying massive release clauses was always going to struggle to be a successful strategy. It either had to work or would fail big time.

To be fair, your progress has been hampered by your injuries. It could have been a lot better than it is now had your squad been largely fit. Youve been unable to build much rhythm and momentum and so the noise about all the other issues gets louder, and there is more pressure and scrutiny.

Their plan could still work but i think its been put back at least a couple years and you will have to work your way back up the pecking order to elite status in much the same way as most other clubs who look to grow within their means with a more mainstream strategy. Given the falling revenues, you will inevitably have to sell to stay compliant, and lose good assets that will further hamper your progress.

Overall, what looked like a strategy to propel you upwards now looks like much more of a long term project.

It is fascinating, that is undeniable. Really it is a unique strategy for a club of Chelsea’s stature and very interesting to watch it unfold.

I do think they need to consider signing a couple of players over 25 - Toney and Maddison could have been transformative for your side.

What really interests me is what you are going to do with a player like Cole Palmer now - say Real Madrid offer £80m in the summer, do you sell or do you try and build around him? Spurs offer £50m for Gallagher etc

The total paid for the club was over 4b that included debts and future investment.

I think we could make a pretty good go of the model, plenty of teams have done it though more from necessity, Ajax have done quite well over the years for example. We have a global fanbase and revenues that make it more likely to achieve success on snd ofc the field.

It hasn't been done on this scale before and that is why it is not an overnight success. Few rebuilds are, whatever the model.

I think that until the club get past FFP and are operating on a solid compliance model, it will be a unsettled period.The compliance model finding its feet.

I hope in the long run that the club revamp the whole footballing strategy management team.

Winstanley & Lawrence imo are not the best the club can do.

Looking at the bigger picture, long term the club should be in good hands, providing Bohley- Clearlake stick to what the are good at Finance and stay away from playing football manager.

I cant see no reason why they dont follow the City model and bring in the best sporting directors out there and let them guide the football strategy.

I suppose the issue becomes how do you merge the Bohley- Clearlake reasoning of what they want from the club and what accomplished, high achieving, footballing success driven sporting directors need to be able to re-establish CFC as an elite club.?

comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 6 minutes ago
The total paid for the club was over 4b that included debts and future investment.

I think we could make a pretty good go of the model, plenty of teams have done it though more from necessity, Ajax have done quite well over the years for example. We have a global fanbase and revenues that make it more likely to achieve success on snd ofc the field.

It hasn't been done on this scale before and that is why it is not an overnight success. Few rebuilds are, whatever the model.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the way the model has to work is through very shrewd investment in players from here on.

You are inevitably going to have to sell some assets with Gallagher and James top of that list. That will set you back. You need to add some experience to the team as well as some quality in 2 or 3 positions...so the need for loans to get you through will be essential, until the finances change a bit and players like Lukaku are shifted.

its been a wild 18 months and CFC will need to return to a more normal, stable strategy. Key is growing revenue and that needs top level Europe which is why i think its still some time off before you know if you can make it back to the top. Competition is now much harder and the PL are clamping down on the financial rules.

comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 18 minutes ago
The total paid for the club was over 4b that included debts and future investment.

I think we could make a pretty good go of the model, plenty of teams have done it though more from necessity, Ajax have done quite well over the years for example. We have a global fanbase and revenues that make it more likely to achieve success on snd ofc the field.

It hasn't been done on this scale before and that is why it is not an overnight success. Few rebuilds are, whatever the model.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Benfica also very good with this model - I’m sure I heard the other day they have made something like half a billion profit on transfers in the last 5 years.

Like I said earlier though, what will be interesting is when you do unearth a really special player - the next Hazard for instance. In years gone by Chelsea would have added a plethora of quality around a player like that, would the club now instead sell to the highest bidder?

comment by ifarka, (B-C- out) (U8182)
posted 29 seconds ago
I think that until the club get past FFP and are operating on a solid compliance model, it will be a unsettled period.The compliance model finding its feet.

I hope in the long run that the club revamp the whole footballing strategy management team.

Winstanley & Lawrence imo are not the best the club can do.

Looking at the bigger picture, long term the club should be in good hands, providing Bohley- Clearlake stick to what the are good at Finance and stay away from playing football manager.

I cant see no reason why they dont follow the City model and bring in the best sporting directors out there and let them guide the football strategy.

I suppose the issue becomes how do you merge the Bohley- Clearlake reasoning of what they want from the club and what accomplished, high achieving, footballing success driven sporting directors need to be able to re-establish CFC as an elite club.?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

United are also in the market for "the best football directors out there". Spurs have taken years to complete what now looks like a decent setup with Munn and Lange.

Getting the right off pitch structure in place is harder than it sounds IMO.

Strike, Benfica & Ajax both operate in a different league.

The leagues they operate in more or less guarantee success, C/L football for 2/3 club year in year out.

Also the both clubs do have experienced well honed scouting systems.

Devon,

Getting the right off pitch structure in place is harder than it sounds IMO.

Yeah agreed, but Bohley - Clearlake are not shy.

The leagues they operate in more or less guarantee success, C/L football for 2/3 club year in year out.

(Typo,) C/L football for the same 2/3 clubs year in year out

? Are Bohely- Clearlake in the wrong league?

I'm Skeptical that they can make their business model work in the EPL, it is far to competitive, imo you get one format or the other.

Build for an elite status, or create a profitable club which nurtures and develop players for profit and not be to worried where the club sits as long as it is decent top 6 type of status.

Not sure how you build elite status in the current financial landscape.

PL seemingly no longer tolerating breaches, 10 pts for Everton for less than £30m over the limit.

It almost removes the ability to speculate to accumulate.

As NUFC will experience, they need to grow revenues across the board before they can start to expand their spending on players and wages. That must come first.

CFC have large revenues but that will wane a bit the longer they stay out of the main picture. You need to find some headroom in your costs to allow another raft of squad investment. Trouble is that you look a bit desperate now so will be on the back foot in trying to get players out, especially with someone like Gallagher whose contract is running down, or Lukaku whose wages are huge and he's getting on a bit now.

Yeah, i think in all likelihood we will come out of this a first selling club after that ?

comment by Striketeam7 - There used to be a football club over there (U18109)
posted 32 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 18 minutes ago
The total paid for the club was over 4b that included debts and future investment.

I think we could make a pretty good go of the model, plenty of teams have done it though more from necessity, Ajax have done quite well over the years for example. We have a global fanbase and revenues that make it more likely to achieve success on snd ofc the field.

It hasn't been done on this scale before and that is why it is not an overnight success. Few rebuilds are, whatever the model.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Benfica also very good with this model - I’m sure I heard the other day they have made something like half a billion profit on transfers in the last 5 years.

Like I said earlier though, what will be interesting is when you do unearth a really special player - the next Hazard for instance. In years gone by Chelsea would have added a plethora of quality around a player like that, would the club now instead sell to the highest bidder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have unearthed some pretty special in the past, keeping them has been the issue, Salah, KDB, Robben, Lukaku (the overseas model) but in our previous life they were not given a chance. Some didn't look that impressive at the time and by that token we may already have some. It is going to be a challenge on many levels and I hope we stick with it. I don't think we can afford to change our thinking anytime soon.

I'm happy to see it through and to be fair, more focused on info relating to the ground at the moment. Oh and next year's season ticket price, we are about to experience outer 2nd or 3rd increase over the past 20
years or so.

I think people get so caught up due to the media narrative of £1billion spent. When really it is about £600m. Not much more than utd and arsenal, even spurs.

If we sell broja and a couple others (this doesn't include loans for maatsen, hall etc) then our net spend over last 5 years will be about £500m.

With the amortization of long crontracts, this works out at something like £75m per season.

It's not the way I would have done it by a long stretch but we are here now, and have to trust them to some degree.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 46 minutes ago
Not sure how you build elite status in the current financial landscape.

PL seemingly no longer tolerating breaches, 10 pts for Everton for less than £30m over the limit.

It almost removes the ability to speculate to accumulate.

As NUFC will experience, they need to grow revenues across the board before they can start to expand their spending on players and wages. That must come first.

CFC have large revenues but that will wane a bit the longer they stay out of the main picture. You need to find some headroom in your costs to allow another raft of squad investment. Trouble is that you look a bit desperate now so will be on the back foot in trying to get players out, especially with someone like Gallagher whose contract is running down, or Lukaku whose wages are huge and he's getting on a bit now.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is true but also before Roman and European football our revenues have always been high. We started to address costs with a reduction in our wage bill over the last couple of years. New sponsorships etc will also help. We aim to be in in Europe as does any club with ambition though the lack of it may not be as financially painful in the short term as some think.

All that aside it's nice to have a decent conversation with some Spurs fans.

Also just to add, chelsea are the most followed london club worldwide according to all metrics (social media following etc).

Either way we will be in the top 5 in UK and top 20 in Europe in terms of revenue regardless of european football. Although the concern shoul ddefinitely be there.

VISION?

What Clearlake are doing is nonsense. Got rid of a whole squad of experienced pros, many of whom had won everything and replaced them with "potential". I have no problem with having players with potential, but selling top players and the homegrown potential and replacing them with inferior players is just stupid.

Look at Sanchez, Cucurella, Koulibaly, Disasi, Madueke, Jackson just to name a few, are they better than Chalobah, Hall, Pulisic, Loftus Cheek etc? I still believe that Fernandez and Caicedo can develop into what we expect, but surely keeping at least one of Kante and Kovacic would have also made sense.

Boehly walked into a club which needed a few cosmetic touches, a creative player, a top defender and a striker and has created a mess.

It does not all lay on his shoulders though. The mistake by the club to allow Rudiger to leave and not just give him what he wanted. Tuchel's inability to play to Lukaku's strengths - why buy a forward who needs crosses into the box or runs off the shoulder of the defender and play a system for Havertz which starved him of service and made him receive the ball back to goal?

In short, he could have come in, cleared the deadwood, bought a striker, maybe Oshimen or Vlahovic or whoever, bought a midfielder, be it Enzo or Caicedo or maybe a De Jong and obviously a better centre half than Koulibaly or Disasi. He would have saves us lots of cash, we'd be competitive and we'd still have an identity.

Some decisions were right. Selling Havertz was an intelligent move as we recouped most of our outlay and he's not suited to the Premier League. Letting Mount go was also okay, he's a good player but will never be great. Azpilicueta wasn't the player he once was.

All in all, it's just a mess.

comment by Eric_Draven (U20260)
posted 6 minutes ago
VISION?

What Clearlake are doing is nonsense. Got rid of a whole squad of experienced pros, many of whom had won everything and replaced them with "potential". I have no problem with having players with potential, but selling top players and the homegrown potential and replacing them with inferior players is just stupid.

Look at Sanchez, Cucurella, Koulibaly, Disasi, Madueke, Jackson just to name a few, are they better than Chalobah, Hall, Pulisic, Loftus Cheek etc? I still believe that Fernandez and Caicedo can develop into what we expect, but surely keeping at least one of Kante and Kovacic would have also made sense.

Boehly walked into a club which needed a few cosmetic touches, a creative player, a top defender and a striker and has created a mess.

It does not all lay on his shoulders though. The mistake by the club to allow Rudiger to leave and not just give him what he wanted. Tuchel's inability to play to Lukaku's strengths - why buy a forward who needs crosses into the box or runs off the shoulder of the defender and play a system for Havertz which starved him of service and made him receive the ball back to goal?

In short, he could have come in, cleared the deadwood, bought a striker, maybe Oshimen or Vlahovic or whoever, bought a midfielder, be it Enzo or Caicedo or maybe a De Jong and obviously a better centre half than Koulibaly or Disasi. He would have saves us lots of cash, we'd be competitive and we'd still have an identity.

Some decisions were right. Selling Havertz was an intelligent move as we recouped most of our outlay and he's not suited to the Premier League. Letting Mount go was also okay, he's a good player but will never be great. Azpilicueta wasn't the player he once was.

All in all, it's just a mess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a vision, it might not match yours but it's theirs. Time will tell on results.

JF, The issue is that they started out with one vision as a C/L club.

Now its another , something they were not equipped to take on.

I seriously don't believe that they would have invested the money they have for a mid table club.

So in all honesty where and what is/ was their vision?

comment by ifarka, (B-C- out) (U8182)
posted 2 hours, 37 minutes ago
JF, The issue is that they started out with one vision as a C/L club.

Now its another , something they were not equipped to take on.

I seriously don't believe that they would have invested the money they have for a mid table club.

So in all honesty where and what is/ was their vision?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry mate, do not understand where you mean there. Are you saying they no longer envisage us as a champions league club because that's not my understanding.

There vision is yo make us a successful club both men snc women plus build a new ground. They committed to ten years without taking any profit which tells me they are not looking short term investment or quick returns. They also committed to invest a billion over 10 years.

Their vision would have been to invest £1bn and expect that to be enough to make the a top 4 team or better, with all the revenues sponsors prize money etc that that brings.

Instead they've invested £1bn and are mid table, no European revenue this season, likely none next season and certainly not UCL, so suddenly their original vision is not affordable or viable and they will have to alter how they operate, what the targets are and the timeframe for these.

FInance and vision are different things, despite that your assumption is incorrect. We have spent a billion but we have also sold Round half a billions worth of players, you are also completely ignoring revenues. This is a common practice, I'm not sure if people really struggle with finances or just chose to think that way. Buy 8n terms of the vision I stand by my last post.

However anyone chooses to define vision, what they've actually done would be business suicide by any model. Imagine buying a successful company and then replacing all your staff and investing in new practices and software within a short space of time. The identity and the people who made that business successful are no longer there. It would be very difficult to maintain that success and regain your standing any time soon. You may have to wait a generation to recover. A bit like Brexit really

comment by Eric_Draven (U20260)
posted 7 minutes ago
However anyone chooses to define vision, what they've actually done would be business suicide by any model. Imagine buying a successful company and then replacing all your staff and investing in new practices and software within a short space of time. The identity and the people who made that business successful are no longer there. It would be very difficult to maintain that success and regain your standing any time soon. You may have to wait a generation to recover. A bit like Brexit really
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, that happens more than you think. I've been involved in a festival mergers and buy outs, besides Chelsea he bought was not the Chelsea 5 or 6 years ago, far from it.