[Football] Chelsea moaning about PSR

Professor Plum · Sep 3, 2024

Green Cross Code Man said:
Would it surprise you if he turned out to be genuinely clueless?

It would, TBH. I mean, I don’t suppose that Boehly and co themselves have a clear grasp of the different rules and standards of the EPL and UEFA but Clearlake as an entity surely must have high powered lawyers and advisors who know exactly how to stay just on the right side of the line. I might be wrong but I’d be very surprised if they weren’t being advised every step of the way. It doesn’t make it right morally or in terms of sports ethics, but legally? A multibillion dollar hedge fund will be paying people to keep them legal. Surely? (Hope I’m wrong!)

schmunk · Sep 3, 2024

Nobby Cybergoat said:
I admit it would slightly

I think he's got a strategy. I think it's an incredibly high risk strategy and I would in no way want my club to indulge in it, but I'm prepared to concede he likely at least understands the basics, "such as contracts need to be paid for their duration" of what he's trying to do.

I could see a situation where in 2 or 3 years, just the sheer amount of money they throw gets them to the top of the PL pile and puts them in a good position to negotiate some kind of ultra lucrative superleague and uses the economic leverage from that to force smaller clubs to vote out any spending restrictions.

I could equally see it exploding in their faces

Yes, with the current structure, the ONLY way that this can work for Chelsea is if they can make their way to the lucrative later stages of the Champions League. All other paths (including the lesser European cups) will fail to deliver the cash injections needed to sustain the ongoing salary and transfer costs.

With them currently sitting ~~proudly~~ in *checks notes* 11th position in the PL table, this looks to be a highly likely* outcome.

* un-

Nobby Cybergoat · Sep 3, 2024

schmunk said:
Yes, with the current structure, the ONLY way that this can work for Chelsea is if they can make their way to the lucrative later stages of the Champions League. All other paths (including the lesser European cups) will fail to deliver the cash injections needed to sustain the ongoing salary and transfer costs.

With them currently sitting ~~proudly~~ in *checks notes* 11th position in the PL table, this looks to be a highly likely* outcome.

* un-

Not sure.

They clearly have the money to sustain the salary and transfer costs. But likely not within the current spending rules. And as we’ve seen, the current spending rules can be circumvented, or they might just reason they will take their chances with any points deductions or fight any euro competition bans in court.

I just think that even with the off pitch chaos, they have enough quality individuals to get them up and around those positions. If you buy 30 odd players for £50m a go, it stands to reason 4 or 5 will be really good and one will be exceptional.

I’m not saying their “plan” will definitely work. I’m just less sure that it will definitely fail than many here.

schmunk · Sep 3, 2024

Nobby Cybergoat said:
Not sure.

They clearly have the money to sustain the salary and transfer costs. But likely not within the current spending rules. And as we’ve seen, the current spending rules can be circumvented, or they might just reason they will take their chances with any points deductions or fight any euro competition bans in court.

I just think that even with the off pitch chaos, they have enough quality individuals to get them up and around those positions. If you buy 30 odd players for £50m a go, it stands to reason 4 or 5 will be really good and one will be exceptional.

I’m not saying their “plan” will definitely work. I’m just less sure that it will definitely fail than many here.

Apologies - I meant within the PSR framework, rather than actual accounting rules - as we know, Toad "Croesus" Boehly and pals can bankroll the club's losses indefinitely.

ditchy · Sep 3, 2024

Interesting to see that they are trying to implement an American investment bank structure of lowish basic salary with big bonus structure . Being owned ultimately by a hedge fund , it will be interesting and alarming to see what would happen ,if we had a major downturn in global stock /bond markets .

Nobby Cybergoat · Sep 3, 2024

ditchy said:
Interesting to see that they are trying to implement an American investment bank structure of lowish basic salary with big bonus structure . Being owned ultimately by a hedge fund , it will be interesting and alarming to see what would happen ,if we had a major downturn in global stock /bond markets .

??

El Presidente · Sep 3, 2024

Chelsea are briefing client journalists with the tale that mant new signings are coming in on low salaries of £60k a week and this is being parroted as if it is gospel.

Remember the Albion had an agreement to sell Caicedo to Liverpool before he went to Chelsea? Liverpool pay high salaries and therefore Chelsea would have to match those shirley?

The only way that wouldn’t happen would be if Chelsea persuaded Caicedo’s agent with a big commision to lie to the player that Liverpool were offering a low salary. Therefore what was on offer from Chelsea would appear competitive. I’m sure both the club and the agent are far too professional to do something that underhand.

Palmer and Jackson have just signed extensions to their contracts committing themselves to staying at The Chels until 2033, they won’t have done that for peanuts.

deletebeepbeepbeep · Sep 3, 2024

El Presidente said:
Chelsea are briefing client journalists with the tale that mant new signings are coming in on low salaries of £60k a week and this is being parroted as if it is gospel.

Remember the Albion had an agreement to sell Caicedo to Liverpool before he went to Chelsea? Liverpool pay high salaries and therefore Chelsea would have to match those shirley?

The only way that wouldn’t happen would be if Chelsea persuaded Caicedo’s agent with a big commision to lie to the player that Liverpool were offering a low salary. Therefore what was on offer from Chelsea would appear competitive. I’m sure both the club and the agent are far too professional to do something that underhand.

Palmer and Jackson have just signed extensions to their contracts committing themselves to staying at The Chels until 2033, they won’t have done that for peanuts.

The only reason that the Palmer and Jackson extensions would make sense is that the Club managed to sell them on a lower weekly wage but for a longer contract. Is that what you think happened or do you think they are just protecting their investment?

I just think it is all a bit strange because apparently Chelsea didn't want to break their new wage structure, hence trying to get rid of Sterling and Chillwell.

So they spent days trying to get Osimhen to sign for less money than he currently was making at Napoli instead of signing Ivan Toney or another attainable striker. They then signed Jackson to a contract extension for 9 years, for some reason??

Is there weird financial shenanigans going on here? Or are Chelsea incompetent? Or both? (Rhetorical question - obviously it is both).

SeagullsoverLondon · Sep 3, 2024

El Presidente said:
Chelsea are briefing client journalists with the tale that mant new signings are coming in on low salaries of £60k a week and this is being parroted as if it is gospel.

Remember the Albion had an agreement to sell Caicedo to Liverpool before he went to Chelsea? Liverpool pay high salaries and therefore Chelsea would have to match those shirley?

The only way that wouldn’t happen would be if Chelsea persuaded Caicedo’s agent with a big commision to lie to the player that Liverpool were offering a low salary. Therefore what was on offer from Chelsea would appear competitive. I’m sure both the club and the agent are far too professional to do something that underhand.

Palmer and Jackson have just signed extensions to their contracts committing themselves to staying at The Chels until 2033, they won’t have done that for peanuts.

Is there an easy way to work out average salaries of players for each club from their accounts?

Papa Lazarou · Sep 3, 2024

El Presidente said:
Chelsea are briefing client journalists with the tale that mant new signings are coming in on low salaries of £60k a week and this is being parroted as if it is gospel.

Remember the Albion had an agreement to sell Caicedo to Liverpool before he went to Chelsea? Liverpool pay high salaries and therefore Chelsea would have to match those shirley?

The only way that wouldn’t happen would be if Chelsea persuaded Caicedo’s agent with a big commision to lie to the player that Liverpool were offering a low salary. Therefore what was on offer from Chelsea would appear competitive. I’m sure both the club and the agent are far too professional to do something that underhand.

Palmer and Jackson have just signed extensions to their contracts committing themselves to staying at The Chels until 2033, they won’t have done that for peanuts.

So, we could afford Colwill then*?

* In the alternate reality where these stories are true

keaton · Sep 3, 2024

Go big or go gnome: how Chelsea’s transfer dealings inspired my new venture | Jonathan Liew

Asking a rival to take one of your best players for no fee while still paying most of his wages is a level of hustle I cannot match

www.theguardian.com

keaton · Sep 3, 2024

Nobby Cybergoat said:
Not sure.

They clearly have the money to sustain the salary and transfer costs. But likely not within the current spending rules. And as we’ve seen, the current spending rules can be circumvented, or they might just reason they will take their chances with any points deductions or fight any euro competition bans in court.

I just think that even with the off pitch chaos, they have enough quality individuals to get them up and around those positions. If you buy 30 odd players for £50m a go, it stands to reason 4 or 5 will be really good and one will be exceptional.

I’m not saying their “plan” will definitely work. I’m just less sure that it will definitely fail than many here.

But aren't they going to find it difficult to sign players in the coming years? Even if (big if) they start performing you've still got to persuade players to sign when you've a history of treating others like shit and then persuade them to apparently take lower wages with a longer contract ( and less chance you can get a big signing on fee in future). They've failed to get the big names they wanted this summer and I can't remember anyone else being in for the players they did sign, who's choosing them over other big clubs

El Presidente · Sep 3, 2024

SeagullsoverLondon said:
Is there an easy way to work out average salaries of players for each club from their accounts?

I take a crude approach, take the total payroll cost from the annual acounts, allocate a proportion of it to the first team and divide by 30. I know a few clubs and they say it's not a million miles away. These are the 22/23 figures when Chelsea reached the QF of the Champions League but of course Chelsea are paying nowhere near these figures this season if the client journalists are to be believed.

Professor Plum · Sep 3, 2024

El Presidente said:
Chelsea are briefing client journalists with the tale that mant new signings are coming in on low salaries of £60k a week and this is being parroted as if it is gospel.

Remember the Albion had an agreement to sell Caicedo to Liverpool before he went to Chelsea? Liverpool pay high salaries and therefore Chelsea would have to match those shirley?

The only way that wouldn’t happen would be if Chelsea persuaded Caicedo’s agent with a big commision to lie to the player that Liverpool were offering a low salary. Therefore what was on offer from Chelsea would appear competitive. I’m sure both the club and the agent are far too professional to do something that underhand.

Palmer and Jackson have just signed extensions to their contracts committing themselves to staying at The Chels until 2033, they won’t have done that for peanuts.

I'm pretty sure it's true that Chelsea have reduced their individual player wage offers substantially. I've heard this from too many sources on podcasts and interviews, including from people who are clearly well connected at the club. I'm guessing that the lengthy contracts on offer --between 6 and 9 years -- are seen as fair compensation for the lower wages.

I'm just guessing here but I suspect that the players will also be heavily incentivised. "If we get into the Champions League you'll get a very hefty bonus" - sort of thing.

Triggaaar · Sep 3, 2024

El Presidente said:
Chelsea are briefing client journalists

There's an oxymoron

Triggaaar · Sep 3, 2024

Professor Plum said:
I'm pretty sure it's true that Chelsea have reduced their individual player wage offers substantially. I've heard this from too many sources on podcasts and interviews, including from people who are clearly well connected at the club.

If Chelsea are feeding a lie to journalists they pay (I said if), then it's not true no matter how many of them say it, especially if they're well connected to the club.

Professor Plum said:
I'm guessing that the lengthy contracts on offer --between 6 and 9 years -- are seen as fair compensation for the lower wages.

Nah.

Professor Plum · Sep 3, 2024

Triggaaar said:
If Chelsea are feeding a lie to journalists they pay (I said if), then it's not true no matter how many of them say it, especially if they're well connected to the club..

There's no reason to doubt it really, IMO. It's all relative. It's been well known for ages that Sterling was on £325K a week and Lukaku and Kepa also on very high salaries -- nearly £300K a week -- and that Clearlake were desperate to get rid of the expense. There's no way that the new recruits are on anything remotely close to that. Well, not sure about Felix, Neto, Sancho but certainly the hordes of smaller fry they've swept up are said to be on much lower salaries in exchange for the greater security of a longer term deal.

raymondo · Sep 3, 2024

Professor Plum said:
There's no reason to doubt it really, IMO. It's all relative. It's been well known for ages that Sterling was on £325K a week and Lukaku and Kepa also on very high salaries -- nearly £300K a week -- and that Clearlake were desperate to get rid of the expense. There's no way that the new recruits are on anything remotely close to that. Well, not sure about Felix, Neto, Sancho but certainly the hordes of smaller fry they've swept up are said to be on much lower salaries in exchange for the greater security of a longer term deal.

It's an interesting topic.
Personally, I'd have though that confident young players (e.g. Palmer) would take the higher salary and shorter contract (if given the choice).... thanks very much.

He knows he'd be snapped up in a few years.

schmunk · Sep 3, 2024

Professor Plum said:
There's no reason to doubt it really, IMO. It's all relative. It's been well known for ages that Sterling was on £325K a week and Lukaku and Kepa also on very high salaries -- nearly £300K a week -- and that Clearlake were desperate to get rid of the expense. There's no way that the new recruits are on anything remotely close to that. Well, not sure about Felix, Neto, Sancho but certainly the hordes of smaller fry they've swept up are said to be on much lower salaries in exchange for the greater security of a longer term deal.

Whilst that's the story, most young players would be signed on 4 or 5 year deals by any club (see our recent signings), so it doesn't make much sense for players (or their experienced agents, who will be getting a slice) to accept a significant discount for an 8 year contract, particularly as it's generally expected that these contracts will not be seen out to completion - either extended or traded away.

Edit: Yeah, what he said...

Triggaaar · Sep 3, 2024

Professor Plum said:
There's no reason to doubt it really, IMO.

I can give you a couple of reasons to doubt it. 1) An expert has told us that Chelsea are paying people to claim that new signings are on low salaries and 2) We know the expensive signings they're making don't accept such low salaries at other PL clubs.

Professor Plum said:
It's all relative. It's been well known for ages that Sterling was on £325K a week and Lukaku and Kepa also on very high salaries -- nearly £300K a week

And yet you think players are going to be happy to take his place on just £60k a week? "Hi, we think you're better than Sterling, and want you to do what he does, but for a fifth of the salary - ok?"

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Chelsea moaning about PSR

Well-known member

Why oh why oh why?

Well-known member

Why oh why oh why?

a man with a sound track record as a source of qua

Well-known member

The ONLY Gay in Brighton

Well-known member

......

Living in a De Zerbi wonderland

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls

Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls

The ONLY Gay in Brighton

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Why oh why oh why?

Well-known member

Share this page