Chelsea Thread - 2023/24

[Semper aggressus]

Dark horses for the title?

 

[KentBlue]

never has a good word for our club or the fans who backed him.

Didn't know this. I don't care either way, he's gone and he's no longer a player whose progress I shall watch with any interest, but if he really has slagged us off then fuck him.

 

[hammocity]

Didn't know this. I don't care either way, he's gone and he's no longer a player whose progress I shall watch with any interest, but if he really has slagged us off then fuck him.

Not slagged us off but never had a good word and missed two trophy parades, disrespectful in my opinion and his body language when he picked up his Premier League medal after the Villa game was shocking. I posted on BM and the Sterling fan boys came out in force dismissing my opinion that he didn’t give a fuck about the club and he was off, I was glad to see him go.

 

[Asa's left peg]

So I understand the amortisation thingy, 80m player transfer spread over 8 years = 10m per year spend. What I don't understand is not getting your finger out and signing a shirt sponsor, in time for the season, that would give you 70 m a year therefore giving you 7/8 players?

Am I missing something or do companies do not want to associate themselves with Chelsea?

 

[JASR]

So I understand the amortisation thingy, 80m player transfer spread over 8 years = 10m per year spend. What I don't understand is not getting your finger out and signing a shirt sponsor, in time for the season, that would give you 70 m a year therefore giving you 7/8 players?

Am I missing something or do companies do not want to associate themselves with Chelsea?

I think You’re missing, along with many Chelsea fans, the ongoing cost of ‘other’ years amortisation of previous buys.

With regard to shirt sponsor, I think they’ve had 2 ready to go, before they were rejected (not by them)

 

[halfcenturyup]

So I understand the amortisation thingy, 80m player transfer spread over 8 years = 10m per year spend. What I don't understand is not getting your finger out and signing a shirt sponsor, in time for the season, that would give you 70 m a year therefore giving you 7/8 players?

Am I missing something or do companies do not want to associate themselves with Chelsea?

Not completely sure of the situation but the commentator yesterday said they had had two sponsors turned down? Paramount because of broadcasting integrity concerns, and another because of some associated thingy with Silverlake?

 

[Asa's left peg]

Not completely sure of the situation but the commentator yesterday said they had had two sponsors turned down? Paramount because of broadcasting integrity concerns, and another because of some associated thingy with Silverlake?

I suppose their money guys are so busy finding funds for transfers they can't even find time to do a deal the newsagent across the road! The Paramount thing and, to a lesser event, Silverlake should have been clear were going to be difficult. Bohely must know some American companies to do a deal with!
It just feels very unproffessional and rushed - a bit like their transfer business

 

[Semper aggressus]

I still don’t understand why they didn’t try to sign Kane and Neymar.

 

[hammocity]

So I understand the amortisation thingy, 80m player transfer spread over 8 years = 10m per year spend. What I don't understand is not getting your finger out and signing a shirt sponsor, in time for the season, that would give you 70 m a year therefore giving you 7/8 players?

Am I missing something or do companies do not want to associate themselves with Chelsea?

Last year’s signings have been amortised over 6/7/8 year contracts but that loop hole is now closed and 5 years is now the maximum. Plus as pointed out they’ve still got amortised contracts of players bought in the previous 5 years or so, they’ll be fucked in future years with no wiggle room for signings unless they sell players who are willing to give up lucrative contracts. Basket case of a club.

 

[waspish]

Last year’s signings have been amortised over 6/7/8 year contracts but that loop hole is now closed and 5 years is now the maximum. Plus as pointed out they’ve still got amortised contracts of players bought in the previous 5 years or so, they’ll be fucked in future years with no wiggle room for signings unless they sell players who are willing to give up lucrative contracts. Basket case of a club.

Keep correcting people who post 5 years is the limit now it is in uefa in the premier it isn't you could have a 10 years contract there is NO premier ffp rule on how long a contract can be..