How much will Chelsea sell for? ‘They’re not worth £3bn’ as Roman Abramovich puts club up for sale

“You’re getting sold in the morning,” became a favoured chant among Luton Town fans during Wednesday’s FA Cup defeat to Chelsea. Just how quickly the Roman Abramovich era comes to a close remains to be seen.

Thomas Tuchel will no doubt have welcomed a brief 90-minute pause from the awkward questions – well, almost, were it not for persistent chants of “Ukraine!” from the home supporters at Kenilworth Road.

In the midst of Abramovich’s announcement that the club is up for sale, potential investors – including the consortium fronted by American Todd Boehly – will have noted that the current owner promised to write off the £1.5bn debt owed to him by Chelsea.

“It’s a bit of an empty gesture,” football finance expert Professor Tom Cannon tells i. “I don’t think he ever expected to get that money back. There was no way Chelsea were ever going to be in a position to repay that money and say ‘thank you, Roman, now here’s £1.5bn’.

More from Football

How Huddersfield built back stronger with a Bielsa disciple and a plan to trick new signings03 March, 2022Premier League confident Chelsea can continue playing even if Abramovich's assets are frozen03 March, 2022Premier League considers terminating broadcast deals with Russian TV channels03 March, 2022

“No new owner was going to come in to pay the kind of money Abramovich is talking about and then be loaded with £1.5bn debt.”

Abramovich is believed to be holding out for £3bn, though Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss – part of Boehly’s interested consortium – is understood to consider that overpriced.

“That would value them at more than Manchester United, which would be a stretch,” Cannon adds. “Chelsea have nothing like the global fanbase that Manchester United or Liverpool have. And there’s no way a new owner would be interested at £3bn if there was also a £1.5bn debt.”

Chelsea’s value, as estimated by financial assessors, is closer to £1.6bn. The playing squad is worth around £800m and as Champions League holders and Club World Cup champions, they are in a strong position when it comes to global appeal.

But what makes the sale more pressing is discussion within the House of Commons regarding potential sanctions against Russian oligarchs, including Abramovich, due to alleged affiliation with Vladimir Putin. Abramovich has previously denied those links and has insisted he has not done anything which warrants sanctioning.

The question is how heavily Abramovich’s desire to move quickly will affect the sale. Stephen Taylor Heath, Head of Sports Law at JMW Solicitors, points out that writing off the debt is not just about attracting investors, but also distancing him from the club more permanently.

“The writing off of the debt will make a sale easier, but it was probably a necessity if the intention was to avoid any future argument of ongoing influence in the club’s affairs,” Taylor Heath tells i. “If the debt had remained, there might have been an argument of ongoing leverage arising from the terms of the loans.”

i revealed on Wednesday that there is one other major stumbling block deterring new investors – Stamford Bridge itself. It is smaller than the stadia of Chelsea’s London rivals – Tottenham, Arsenal and West Ham – and has limited capacity for redevelopment, not least because the ground’s freehold is not owned by Abramovich but by Chelsea Pitch Owners (CPO).

More on Chelsea FC

Premier League confident Chelsea can continue playing even if Abramovich's assets are frozen03 March, 2022Three billionaires, Saudi royalty and a UFC star… meet the investors who could buy Chelsea03 March, 2022Abramovich is unlikely to prevent damage to his reputation with charitable Chelsea sale03 March, 2022

Whatever happens, Abramovich’s sale will be a huge upscale on the £150m he paid Ken Bates in 2003, a reflection of 21 trophies won and £2bn spent.

“It’s a firesale, there’s no other word for it,” Cannon says. “He’s turning an asset which he can’t make any cash benefit from [if the club becomes a frozen asset] into cash.

“The way he’s phrasing this is very confusing – if he’s selling the club for £3bn and some of that is going to assist people in Ukraine, is he just taking the legal fees and most of the £3bn will go to people being affected? Or are there other costs to put against that £3bn, especially if he’s writing off the £1.5bn?

“That’s very unclear.”

Abramovich’s charity comes too little, too late

By Kevin Garside, i‘s chief sports correspondent

Abramovich said that it had been an “incredibly difficult decision” and described his ownership of the club as “the privilege of a lifetime”. But the language of affection and care, of custodianship, rang hollow against the background of an apparent frenzy to clear out before the threatened global sanctions could be imposed by the West, removing the option from him.

In an FA Cup tie with Luton, the Chelsea fans behind one goal sang his name before kick-off, their failure to grasp the true nature of his relationship with “their” club as wildly off the pace as Russian citizens who believe Vladimir Putin is doing good work in Ukraine. They were presumably moved by the apparent generosity of the terms of the sale, the proceeds of which will go to victims of the war in Ukraine.

Abramovich said he did not expect to recoup the estimated £1.5bn in loans to the club. For a man worth 10 times that, he can put any losses down to an accounting write-off, acceptable depreciation. In the context of his multibillion vault, coughing up whatever is left over from the Chelsea sale might be better understood as an early, pro-active attempt to reshape the post-war narrative.

Hitherto, Abramovich has vehemently denied allegations of ongoing association with Putin. But as Putin gravitated ever more towards the dictator’s mindset, evidenced by the move into South Ossetia as long ago as 2008, the scrutiny on individuals with potential links to the Kremlin has only increased.

A cynic could conclude that Abramovich’s primary concern as the Russian forces continue to pummel Ukraine is for himself. The life he led in London, feted as the architect of Chelsea’s rise to Premier League and European champions, a distant memory.

Read Kevin Garside’s full analysis here

from Football | News and analysis from the Premier League and beyond | iNews https://ift.tt/UtTADRJ