Shit Club No History: Page 24 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Shit Club No History

lorddulaarsenal

Fair play to him donating all proceeds from the sale to charities to support those impacted by the invasion of Ukraine

Clrnc

Fair play to him. Seems like he is really different from the other evils

Don Pacifico

Clrnc wrote:
Fair play to him. Seems like he is really different from the other evils

Think his past is still pretty shady.

Anyways, the king is dead, long live the king etc...

Clrnc

He won't be asking back the 1.5bn too that he gave Chelsea. So Chelsea will survive and build on here. Doubt next owner let them spend unlimitedly although to be honest they have sold so well they spent within their means past decade.

He is pretty smart since EU statement meant they will clamp down on all the Obligarch and he might lose Chelsea anyway

mdgoonah41

The Athletic understands that Abramovich made that move amid Russia’s continued invasion of neighbouring Ukraine. There was last week a call in parliament for Abramovich to be hit with UK government sanctions.

Earlier on Wednesday, the billionaire Hansjorg Wyss told Swiss newspaper Blick that Abramovich "wants to get rid of Chelsea quickly" after the threat of sanctions was raised.

In a statement published on Chelsea’s website on Wednesday, Abramovich said: “I would like to address the speculation in (the) media over the past few days in relation to my ownership of Chelsea FC. As I have stated before, I have always taken decisions with the club’s best interest at heart. In the current situation, I have therefore taken the decision to sell the club, as I believe this is in the best interest of the club, the fans, the employees, as well as the club’s sponsors and partners.

“The sale of the club will not be fast-tracked but will follow due process. I will not be asking for any loans to be repaid. This has never been about business nor money for me, but about pure passion for the game and club. Moreover, I have instructed my team to set up a charitable foundation where all net proceeds from the sale will be donated. The foundation will be for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine. This includes providing critical funds towards the urgent and immediate needs of victims, as well as supporting the long-term work of recovery.

“Please know that this has been an incredibly difficult decision to make, and it pains me to part with the club in this manner. However, I do believe this is in the best interest of the club.

“I hope that I will be able to visit Stamford Bridge one last time to say goodbye to all of you in person. It has been a privilege of a lifetime to be part of Chelsea FC and I am proud of all our joint achievements. Chelsea Football Club and its supporters will always be in my heart.”

Ray

They deserve someone like Mike Ashley to take over.

lorddulaarsenal

Despite not having to repay any loans, the new owners will have to suck up that massive wage bill initially.

They’ll fade away now.

QuincyAbeyie

I may have missed something, but what makes them more likely to fade away with a new owner than with Abramovich?

lorddulaarsenal

Unlikely to find someone willing to fund them in the way he did.

jones

goon

😆

Chelsea will be fine, just have to hope they get shitty owners like the Glaziers.

JazzG

mdgoonah41 wrote:

The Athletic understands that Abramovich made that move amid Russia’s continued invasion of neighbouring Ukraine. There was last week a call in parliament for Abramovich to be hit with UK government sanctions.

Earlier on Wednesday, the billionaire Hansjorg Wyss told Swiss newspaper Blick that Abramovich "wants to get rid of Chelsea quickly" after the threat of sanctions was raised.

In a statement published on Chelsea’s website on Wednesday, Abramovich said: “I would like to address the speculation in (the) media over the past few days in relation to my ownership of Chelsea FC. As I have stated before, I have always taken decisions with the club’s best interest at heart. In the current situation, I have therefore taken the decision to sell the club, as I believe this is in the best interest of the club, the fans, the employees, as well as the club’s sponsors and partners.

“The sale of the club will not be fast-tracked but will follow due process. I will not be asking for any loans to be repaid. This has never been about business nor money for me, but about pure passion for the game and club. Moreover, I have instructed my team to set up a charitable foundation where all net proceeds from the sale will be donated. The foundation will be for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine. This includes providing critical funds towards the urgent and immediate needs of victims, as well as supporting the long-term work of recovery.

“Please know that this has been an incredibly difficult decision to make, and it pains me to part with the club in this manner. However, I do believe this is in the best interest of the club.

“I hope that I will be able to visit Stamford Bridge one last time to say goodbye to all of you in person. It has been a privilege of a lifetime to be part of Chelsea FC and I am proud of all our joint achievements. Chelsea Football Club and its supporters will always be in my heart.”

I wonder who helped them draft that statement, played a blinder on the PR front. Clearly shifting it into a charitable trust hasn't worked so he's had to leave.

I wonder if he's made a deal to avoid sanctions or maybe he's being very generous....

JazzG

jones wrote:
Shit Club No History is a chant about Chelsea from what I recall

There you used to be a chant that started "Chelsea, Wherever you may be, You ain't go no history,". I can't remember the rest of the lyrics.

Burnwinter

@lorddulaarsenal wrote:
Unlikely to find someone willing to fund them in the way he did.

Saudi Arabia, sorry Public Investment Fund will be kicking itself it moved on Newcastle six months ago.

JazzG

Burnwinter wrote:
Saudi Arabia, sorry Public Investment Fund will be kicking itself it moved on Newcastle six months ago.

Maybe but a lot of these owners want to buy clubs cheap and then build them up.

Coombs

That statement from Abramovich is genius. I despise the man but gotta recognize game, he's whip smart unlike some of these egomaniacs. Like a bizzaro Bernie Sanders. Always been quietly impressed by his choice in underlings, as well.

Burnwinter

For what it's worth, both Abramovich and Usmanov have credible recent track records by the standards of western billionaires. Philanthropy, patronage of sport and the arts, Usmanov's made packets off hipster tech companies, and so on.

I was reading Usmanov's biography a few days ago and he didn't even make his cash from voucher privatisation initially. He sounds rather similar to an Australian mining magnate like Twiggy Forrest: loathsome, but little different.

It would be interesting if someone produced a measurable definition of an oligarchy. I bet there are many plausible sounding candidates you could come up with that wouldn't distinguish Russia from the United States.

Burnwinter

The less nuanced view ...

TambourineMan

That was a well crafted statement but it's really not as generous as it is made to sound. Here's why:

He says that he will not ask for the loans to be repaid and that the net proceeds of the sale will be donated to the victims of the war. That sounds fantastic but he is getting reimbursed for the loan via the purchase price he agrees on the sale of the club. As part of the sale process, he will likely commit to writing of the debt owed to him so as to ensure the new owner does not inherit this liability (this is common practice in a lot of acquisitions - shareholder borrowings are often forgiven as part of the sale process as most buyers do not want to inherit such a volatile liability and would rather deal with financial institutions for larger debt arrangements) but this is not done for free. It will be worked into the purchase price and Roman's team will structure his net proceeds in a way that it accounts for this debt forgiveness. So in reality he is getting paid for the debt he's owed and the carrying value of the club's other net assets as at the date of divestment. The proceeds received in excess of this (i.e. the forgiven debt and club's net assets) is not going to be a material amount and this is what then gets 'donated'. Further, if it's sold at a discount it very likely that there will be no net proceeds from the sale.
He is not explicit in who the victims of this war are in his statement.
He's a dickhead and I'm glad he'll be leaving English football. The best we can hope for now is that Chelsea are taken over by the Kroenke's MK II.

QuincyAbeyie

That's the way I read it as well.

« Previous Page Next Page »