Summer 26 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc.

[Dave]

Think they're going to need to do that anyway. Problem is, who are those players who will generate hefty fees? Palmer / Caicedo / Joao Pedro / Fernandez / maybe Cucurella?

Sell three of them and you've probably got £200m back, but does Rogers (or equivalent) now want to join a team that has just sold its most creative assets and isn't playing in Europe?

[cdbearsfan]

I'd imagine still yes. There seem to have been whisperings of this potential move for months now. Realistically, the rules still mean that they are more likely to be long-term challengers than us. We are doing brilliantly to keep doing so well despite the restrictions.

[Sexual Ealing]

Players don't really think about the long-term though. If he signs for six years and it takes them three to get back competing, he'll be in his late-20s and will have risked being overtaken by all manner of youngsters in the meantime.

[Dave]

I'd imagine still yes. There seem to have been whisperings of this potential move for months now. Realistically, the rules still mean that they are more likely to be long-term challengers than us. We are doing brilliantly to keep doing so well despite the restrictions.

"Months" ago when these stories were being "whispered", Chelsea were still seen as likely candidates to qualify for the Champions League, and while they would still have been a complete basket-case, they wouldn't be quite so financially screwed as they are now.

There was talk last Spring that Rashford would join us permanently. Then we had to deal with the £100m hole in our accounts instead.

In fact, part of the Chelsea's problem are the restrictions, which are more punitive than the ones we had to deal with last summer. Good luck to them having a net positive transfer balance this summer once they've given us £100m for Rogers.

[cdbearsfan]

They wouldn't be given £100 million this summer, they'd be giving us £20 million. Then the same for the next few years or until he moves on again and they amortise what's left.

I'd like to believe the rules will hamstring Chelsea, but all the evidence suggests that the rules will just be subverted or ignored if there is any potential for that. The so-called penalty they received last year removed any remaining doubt that the cabal can do whatever the fuck they want.

[Stu82]

They wouldn't be given £100 million this summer, they'd be giving us £20 million. Then the same for the next few years or until he moves on again and they amortise what's left.

I'd like to believe the rules will hamstring Chelsea, but all the evidence suggests that the rules will just be subverted or ignored if there is any potential for that. The so-called penalty they received last year removed any remaining doubt that the cabal can do whatever the fuck they want.

The £20m per year is the amortisation on the books, not an agreement on a fee.
Hope that helps.
I think they are screwed and if Roger’s goes he’ll be going North or to PSG.

[aev]

Aren't the wages they pay less than players may get elsewhere, but the length of contract compensates for that? ( I guess this works as a player if you think wages wont continue increasing).

[Dave]

They wouldn't be given £100 million this summer, they'd be giving us £20 million. Then the same for the next few years or until he moves on again and they amortise what's left.

I'd like to believe the rules will hamstring Chelsea, but all the evidence suggests that the rules will just be subverted or ignored if there is any potential for that. The so-called penalty they received last year removed any remaining doubt that the cabal can do whatever the fuck they want.

The £20m per year is the amortisation on the books, not an agreement on a fee.
Hope that helps.
I think they are screwed and if Roger’s goes he’ll be going North or to PSG.

It's also conflating UEFA and the Premier League. I'm quite happy to believe that the Premier League would likely bend over to help Chelsea out of a financial or sporting pickle.

But the evidence when it comes to UEFA is that they would be quite comfortable standing on Chelsea's neck while they rifle through their pockets.

[Dante Lavelli]

About 50% of the money used by Clearlake/Boehly was a loan by a company called Areas (?).  What I read is the interest matures in 2032, by which time they’ll owe them about £1bn i.e. what they paid originally.  The money was originally intended for a new stadium so god know what will happen.

The sources was v detailed (in the FFP thread) but I’m unsure how credible.  For what its worth the same bloke did a review of the AV accounts and was generally complimentary ie pushing the boundaries as far as possible and without burdening ourselves with debt.