Chelski record £80.2m losses

[Bwfcraig]

Proberly just mean his kids pocket money is reduced to 10m a week. But will he leave Stamford Bridge amist the rumours that Chelsea are a failed investment?
http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hli ... s&channel=&

£80.2 million for finishing second in the prem - they'll only spend more.

[Nozza]

Chelsea are far from a "failed investment". They have reduced their losses dramatically in the last 12 months, and although RA may have pumped £500 million into Chelsea since he took over it is nothing new. Glazier transferred his debts on Team Manchester (approx 200 million) and Hick/Gillette will spend similar sums of money over the next few years no doubt - especially if the new stadium goes ahead.

RA and Kenyon want Chelsea to become self sustained by 2010, and if their income and merchandising keeps increasing and their losses keep dropping then this will happen. Chelsea FC also has a LOT of assets. Stamford Bridge as a complex will be worth a few bob and they have a state of the art training ground.

Sometimes in life, you have to spend money to make money and this is what RA is doing.

[Simmy]

Chelsea are far from a "failed investment". They have reduced their losses dramatically in the last 12 months, and although RA may have pumped £500 million into Chelsea since he took over it is nothing new. Glazier transferred his debts on Team Manchester (approx 200 million)

How is giving a club £500 million cash the same as giving one a £200 million debt?

As far as RA is concerned, i've never heard anything that indicates he bought chelsea as an investment, the man has practically limitless money, it would mean utterlly nothing to him to be able to make a couple million a year from it. However no chairman in their right mind would let their club carry on the way Chelsea is, they need to get to a point where they can sustain themselves while still competing for the top spot in the prem just incase RA gets bored. They've apparently already cut expenses by 50% already in the last year and they have still made an £80 mil loss, so fook knows how much else they can do.

[communistworkethic]

Chelsea are far from a "failed investment". They have reduced their losses dramatically in the last 12 months, and although RA may have pumped £500 million into Chelsea since he took over it is nothing new. Glazier transferred his debts on Team Manchester (approx 200 million) and Hick/Gillette will spend similar sums of money over the next few years no doubt - especially if the new stadium goes ahead.

RA and Kenyon want Chelsea to become self sustained by 2010, and if their income and merchandising keeps increasing and their losses keep dropping then this will happen. Chelsea FC also has a LOT of assets. Stamford Bridge as a complex will be worth a few bob and they have a state of the art training ground.

Sometimes in life, you have to spend money to make money and this is what RA is doing.

well quoted from Radio 5 live

[Nozza]

Chelsea are far from a "failed investment". They have reduced their losses dramatically in the last 12 months, and although RA may have pumped £500 million into Chelsea since he took over it is nothing new. Glazier transferred his debts on Team Manchester (approx 200 million) and Hick/Gillette will spend similar sums of money over the next few years no doubt - especially if the new stadium goes ahead.

RA and Kenyon want Chelsea to become self sustained by 2010, and if their income and merchandising keeps increasing and their losses keep dropping then this will happen. Chelsea FC also has a LOT of assets. Stamford Bridge as a complex will be worth a few bob and they have a state of the art training ground.

Sometimes in life, you have to spend money to make money and this is what RA is doing.

well quoted from Radio 5 live

Sky Sports News, actually.

[H. Pedersen]

How much of that £80 million loss was the bonehead signings of Shevchenko and Ballack? As long as they don't do anything like that again they'll be fine.

[bobo the clown]

Chelsea are far from a "failed investment". They have reduced their losses dramatically in the last 12 months,

RA and Kenyon want Chelsea to become self sustained by 2010, and if their income and merchandising keeps increasing and their losses keep dropping then this will happen. Chelsea FC also has a LOT of assets. Stamford Bridge as a complex will be worth a few bob and they have a state of the art training ground.

Sometimes in life, you have to spend money to make money and this is what RA is doing.

If it is viewed as an investment then it's a failure & will continue to be.

Even if it's viewed in terms of a financial "long-game" then I suppose only time will tell, but there is, frankly, no fckg chance of them running at a business-like profit. He will NOT make money from this.

Chelsea FC also has a LOT of assets. Stamford Bridge as a complex will be worth a few bob and they have a state of the art training ground.

Maybe ... but there's only so much you can do with a football ground. It's real value arises from its location ... as real estate. I assume making a tidy profit on the land, but closing the club wouldn't really class as a success. (???)

The training ground is nice, but is on land without development permission ... 'semi-green' & could only be sold off similarly.

The players as assetts ?? Without doubt some are, but given what was paid for most & their huge wages who would buy them & pay them enough to make moves attractive ?

If it's viewed as a hobby by a man who earns in a second what most people earn in a year ... then I still think, at present, it's a failure as he hasn't managed to create the flair & 'Galactico' manner that he would have sought. That is the fault of Mourinho & the spirit he engenders ... THAT's why he'll be off soon.

If it's viewed as the most public money laundering exercise ever undertaken ... big success & bravo.

Question is does he make it a success before he gets bored ... or assasinated ... as will surely happen one day.

[communistworkethic]

Stamford Bridge may be an asset but the same applies to them as anyone else in London, if you sell it you've still got to buy somewhere else in the most expensive part of the capital. If they sold the land for say £250 million, a new stadium will cost them around £600million.