How will the Cfc stadium development be financed?
Massive borrowings that will keep the club on the hook for decades.
Draining the finances that should be spent on the team? Very Glazer!
Currently the club does seem to have found a financial formula which will enable us to be PSR compliant , through player banking & trading.
Unfortunately the club have burnt through much of its core asset values to cope with the squad rebuild & maintain PSR compliance. We still have 4/5 highest earners at the club, who do not represent value and are taking up places which on the wage structure table, which may well be needed to incentivise players who are justly progressing or exceptional players we may wish to buy but cannot fit them into our structure because the highest earner slots are taken.
So the goods news is the club should be able to maintain PSR compliance, but that comes at a cost to us being able to build a cohesive top 4 level squad , due to the necessity to trade.
The issue for the stadium expansion is that without C/L football where will the finance come from to pay the expansion bill. AFC under Venger maintained C/L football, it was dire but it worked.
Tottenham under Levy manage it by running the squad on a low level wage budget, & a thin squad lacking in depth,we all know how that goes
Everton more or less have gone bust doing it.
I think CFC will not expand the stadium in the near future unfortunately.
COYBlues
Without C/L football
posted on 11/2/25
Really standard practice, public infrastructure?
Wow, that aint happening down at the bridge.
Chelsea have not been able to expand because of the issues with the local infrastructure, the club either pay for the new infrastructure or its not happening.
Personally i wouldnt want my tax money being spent on any project that involved a new multi billion pound stadium owned by the Glazers + J/R.
Id rather home veterans & get the elderly through a cold winter tbh!
posted on 11/2/25
Isn’t Chelsea’s issue that they don’t own the land? That’s slightly different.
posted on 11/2/25
Chelsea may have to move out of the area.
It wouldn't be popular with the traditionalists but City did it and Everton are about to do it
posted on 11/2/25
Still this is the hypocrisy of this new labour government.
They got no money, but they are able to give out 20% pay rises to the public sector.20 bln +
Give away the UK & Americas most important strategic overseas base and then commit to paying 18bln to rent it back.
Remove the cold winter payments to the elderly.
Overload our already overloaded state schools by out pricing parents out of private education. Increasing class numbers??
Increase NI that business owners must pay, that will lead to less people being hired.
Double taxing non doms on overseas earnings, which is leading to 1 millionaire every 45 seconds leaving the UK and taking their wealth with them.
Countries in Europe & afar are opening their doors for these people.
I could go on, Rachel from accounts handling of the economy will make Liz trusses crashing of the economy look like a light scrape.
Student politics, based on spurious ideology, not based upon what is good for all of the citizens of this country.
This is particularly galling after the lies that were spun in the election, this lot were ment to be different from the Tory wnkers.
They are even worse, not a shred of integrity or compassion for this country.
posted on 11/2/25
The pitch is owned by the CPO, who are part of the club infrastructure and eager for the stadium development.
Its has no bearing on the local council or the governments willingness to help CFC.
Cfc are owned by people with big enough pockets to fund the expansion, much the same as Utd.
posted on 11/2/25
Boris, if CFC were to move the pitch owners would have to agree, as they also own the name Chelsea football club along with the ground.
On the new owners current management of the club, it highly unlikely the CPO would agree to co-operarting.
Bit like Wimbledon & MK Dons!
posted on 11/2/25
I'd forgotton about the CPO.
posted on 11/2/25
The ownership can move the club, but ?
posted on 11/2/25
The lack of any progress has been frustrating for sure and a little worrying.
Gannon was at the last CPO Meeting last month but the only news on the redevelopment was that there was no decision imminent on any progress.
Personally would be sad day to leave the Bridge but can see the merits in moving to the Lillie Bridge Depot site at Earls Court should it be an option.
Would certainly be cheaper but no idea what the CPO would do should it become an option suddenly.
Options are very limited in my opinion given the cost and time it would take to rebuild Stamford Bridge and really not worth doing unless you can significantly increase the capacity.
posted on 12/2/25
CNB 111,
Oyoy, I think the Earlscourt move would only be feasible if the CPO went with it, unlocking the huge financial potential of Stamford Bridge would underpin the viability of a possible move to Earls Court, which would come at a significant cost.
But i dont think the current freeholders of Earlscourt are that open to CFC switching. But I suppose money will talk.
But again, if the club moves how will Clearlake feel about having the pitch owners as partners/ landlords at the new stadium.?
The most realistic options seems to be expansion at Stamford bridge, but how will Clearlake pay for it.?
There would no issues about getting finance, as for them financing a 2bln pound property deal is bread & butter stuff for them, but how would this effect the club ?