Chelsea FC

[elevant]

Stamford Bridge'ilt ära kolimine sai just kõva tõuke

Vastakad tunded. Võib-olla mõnikord kirjutan pikemalt ka, aga esimene väga reaalne samm on tehtud.

[ChelseaFC]

Stamford Bridge'ilt ära kolimine sai just kõva tõuke

Vastakad tunded. Võib-olla mõnikord kirjutan pikemalt ka, aga esimene väga reaalne samm on tehtud.

Hetkel ei ole veel väga suurema staadioniga midagi peale hakata, aga tulevikus ehk küll. Vaadates, kuidas uued staadionid söövad ära selle nostalgia ja ka osa atmosfäärist, siis pigem ei taha. Samas finantsiliselt ja klubi jätkusuutlikuse huvides oleks vahest kasulik.

[elevant]

Hetkel ei ole veel väga suurema staadioniga midagi peale hakata, aga tulevikus ehk küll. Vaadates, kuidas uued staadionid söövad ära selle nostalgia ja ka osa atmosfäärist, siis pigem ei taha. Samas finantsiliselt ja klubi jätkusuutlikuse huvides oleks vahest kasulik.

Madalamad piletihinnad? peale kasvav põlvkond, kes läheb tööle/loob pere ja kes jõudis Chelseani Mourinho aastatel? Peaks ju potentsiaali veidi olema. Atmosfäär on muidugi põhiline miinuspunkt.

[wordprez]

Ma olen täpselt selline Mourinhoaja produkt ja noh, kui staadion on suurem ja pilet soodsam, siis ehk jõuan minagi kunagi mängu vaatama. Selles mõttes olen poolt. Atmosfääri kohta seega rääkida ei tea, aga noh kui mingi 60k tegelast kuskil Barca vastu tagant cheeriks, siis see poleks ka vast kõige halvem. Aga noh, lugedes neid tingimusi, siis ega vist nii pea nagunii miskit ei muutu. 2020ni tundub hetkel ikka jube kaua aega. Üldiselt aga ei tahaks küll, et ajalooliselt* üks suurima külastatavusega klubi lihtsalt nostalgia tõttu vähem rahvast vastu võtaks.

*see va ajalugu on ilmselt CFC kodukalt loetud, ma loodan,et selles mingitki tõetera on ja mitte ultrasiniste prillide tagant nagu (loogiliselt) kogu ülejäänd materjal seal

[ChelseaFC]

Madalamad piletihinnad?

Selle peale ma küll ei loodaks. Arsenali näide on eest võtta. Lootsid ju nemadki sinisilmselt, et suurem staadion, suurem revenue, äkki ka odavamad piletihinnad. Staadion maksab ju kallist raha ning kes selle eest ikka muu maksab, kui mitte meie, fännid. Mina olen varasemast ajast, kui Mourinho ning kuna satun ka staadionile päris tihti, siis on see juba ka kalliks saanud. Aga pean ka tunnistama, et kui tõesti peaks varsti nii olema, et nõudlus piletite järele on nii suur, siis pole muud varianti ju. Praegusel hetkel, kui klubi tõstab ludinal piletihindu fännide ostujõu nõrgenemisest hoolimata (mille tulemus oli see, et praktiliselt iga jorss tänavalt oleks juulis hooajapileti saanud osta), Meistrite liiga, Carling cupi ja FA cupi algusfaasi mängud müüakse vaevu-vaevu välja heal päeval, siis ma väga optimistlik poleks. Lõpuks on uus Old Trafford, kus enamus publikust on välismaalased, kes laule ei tea, ning klõbistavad terve mängu kaameraga.

[Homie]

Vaene Mcchearen vms juba tekkis tal lootus, et saab ennast hakata Lampardi asemel põhimeeskonnas tõestama, aga peal eilset need lootused kustusid.

Foorumi suurima Chelsea fänni, eksperdi ja arvamusliidrina hea töö järjekordselt. Kes Chelseal see noor vennike ründes oli, Starbridge vms?

[elevant]

Lõpuks on uus Old Trafford, kus enamus publikust on välismaalased, kes laule ei tea, ning klõbistavad terve mängu kaameraga.

Ma muidugi kohal pole käind, aga telepildi järgi on meil asjad selles suhtes veel hullemad

Arsenali näidet ei saa päris üks-ühele ette võtta, olevat neil ju aastatepikkused järjekorrad season ticketi jaoks, seetõttu pole omanikel vajadust piletihinda langetada. Kui meil oleks suurem staadion, siis selle täitmiseks Wiganite ja Boltonite vastu peaks hindasid langetama, sest 10 000 vaba istet ei too kasumit kellelegi.

Huvitav küsimus on muidugi see, mis saab Stamford Bridge'ist pärast sealt kolimist. Roman kirjutab enda taskusse? Pole ju sealne maa teps mitte odav.

[M1kker]

Foorumi suurima Chelsea fänni, eksperdi ja arvamusliidrina hea töö järjekordselt. Kes Chelseal see noor vennike ründes oli, Starbridge vms?

Ma olen hingepõhjani solvunud, et sa ei toonud veel välja lootustandvaid kaitsemängijaid Rayan Bernardi ja Patrick one Aanholdi

Mina igatahes ootan nädalavahetust vanade heade sõprade Evertoni seltsis. Olen optimistlik ja ütlen et viiki ei tule

[ChelseaFC]

Ma muidugi kohal pole käind, aga telepildi järgi on meil asjad selles suhtes veel hullemad

Hullem vaevalt. Olen paar korda käinud seal põhjas võõrsilfännina ja on ikka arvestatav hulk selliseid, kes ei saa midagi asjast aru. Kui juba Chelsea vastu on nii, siis ei tea mis madalamate satside vastu seal toimub? Ei hakka spekuleerima ka. Ei maksa unustada, et seal mahutavus pea poole suurem nii et müra suudavad nad igatahes rohkem tekitada. Meistrite Liiga algusfaas, karikamängud ja liigamängud madalama poole vastu on ka meil suhteliselt vaikseks jäänud, peab tunnistama, aga mängud Spursi, Arsenali, Manu ja Liverpooli vastu ning viimastel aastatel ka mingil määral city vastu on küll fännide mõttes vana kaadriväe kohale toonud ning isegi muidu vaiksed küljetribüünid on vokaalselt täitsa kompetentsed. QPR läheb ka suure tõenäosusega sinna patta.

Huvitav küsimus on muidugi see, mis saab Stamford Bridge'ist pärast sealt kolimist. Roman kirjutab enda taskusse? Pole ju sealne maa teps mitte odav.

Rajoon on Londnis üks hinnatumaid ja kallimaid jah, kuid eks pigem finantseeritakse uude staadionisse see saadav tulu.

Mina igatahes ootan nädalavahetust vanade heade sõprade Evertoni seltsis. Olen optimistlik ja ütlen et viiki ei tule

See nädalavahetus pead sa veel leppima ühe teise siniarmee vaatamisega. Viik ei oleks ka seal hea tulemus

[szandor]

Tere Josh!
Viitsid hakka kunagi mängus ka selliseid jagama.

http://www.thefa.com/video/England/Mens-Under-21s/2011-12/Iceland/Joshs-juggling

Ette tänades,

[ChelseaFC]

An open letter to the Directors of Chelsea Pitch Owners PLC
from Bruce M. Buck, Chairman of Chelsea Football Club



Mr. Richard King (Chairman)
Mr. Richard J. Glanvill
Mr. Robert J. Sewell

(together, the Directors)

Chelsea Pitch Owners PLC 22 September 2011
First Floor Unit 7
Waterside
Hamm Moor Lane
Addlestone Surrey
KT15 2SN


Gentlemen

Re: Stamford Bridge

Background

As you may know, Chelsea Football Club (the Club) has been concerned for some time that the
limited capacity of the stadium at Stamford Bridge may have an adverse impact on the Club’s
ability to increase its revenues and continue competing at the highest level of world football.
These concerns will only increase with the implementation of the “Financial Fair Play”
regulations adopted by UEFA.

Most of our major competitors in England and in Europe have, or are planning, substantially
larger stadia than Stamford Bridge, which will allow them to generate additional revenue and
thereby enable them to attract and retain world class players. The Club will only be able to
continue to do this if it can increase its own revenues. As an example, when Arsenal moved to
the Emirates Stadium, its match day revenue more than doubled. A similar increase in seating
capacity at the Club's stadium would generate around £35 million of additional income each
year for the Club.

The Club has, over the last eight years, investigated numerous options to increase the
capacity at Stamford Bridge. Although these efforts continue, it is likely that we will come to
the conclusion that planning, health and safety and construction requirements, combined with
the physical constraints of the site, will prevent further development at Stamford Bridge from
being a financially viable option.

From time to time, since Mr. Abramovich purchased the Club in 2003, landowners and
developers have approached the Club with development ideas relating to a new larger stadium.
The Club has listened to proposals from bona fide third parties and continues to have general
discussions regarding various sites.

22 September 2011
The Club and Mr. Abramovich appreciate that South West London is Chelsea’s ancestral home
and neither the Club nor Mr. Abramovich has any wish to sever that link. In considering
potential alternative sites the Club has not seriously considered sites outside South or West
London. It is the wish of both Mr. Abramovich and the Club that if the Club was to relocate it
would do so to a site as close to Stamford Bridge as the circumstances at such time allow.

Any move to a new stadium would require substantial funding and the Club could only
undertake such a financial commitment if as part of the proposal it included the sale and/or
redevelopment of the whole of the current Stamford Bridge site. The Club’s ability to do this is
currently restricted by the Chelsea Pitch Owners PLC (CPO) structure.

CPO was set up in 1993 in a very different era for the Club. Under assault from property
developers, and after a bitter battle with Cabra Estates plc, the Club only secured its tenure of
Stamford Bridge in 1992 and the costs of that battle left the Club in a very vulnerable
financial state.

CPO was set up to acquire the freehold land upon which the football stadium was constructed
(the Stadium Site). It was not intended to make profits or pay dividends but, as Mr. Ken Bates
said in his letter to potential investors in CPO in 1993, its aim was “to prevent the next
generation of property speculators… getting another planning consent to build flats and
houses in the stadium itself in a fresh attempt to throw the Club out of Stamford Bridge”.

From its launch in 1993 to December 1997, CPO raised funds but without raising a sufficient
amount to acquire the Stadium Site. However, in December 1997, the Club's holding company,
then called Chelsea Village PLC, now called Chelsea FC PLC (Chelsea), provided CPO with a
loan (the Loan) to enable it to acquire Chelsea Stadium Limited (CSL), the company that was
the freeholder of the Stadium Site, and therefore indirectly to acquire the Stadium Site itself.
CSL then granted Chelsea Football Club Limited a 199-year lease to use the Stadium Site at a
peppercorn rent (the Lease). To date, CPO has raised circa £1.5 million from circa 12,000
shareholders and CPO has fulfilled its objective of protecting the Stadium Site.

The need for this protection, however, disappeared following the acquisition of the Club by
Mr. Abramovich in 2003. Ironically, the CPO structure could now actually hinder rather than
enhance the future of the Club as restrictions in the Lease inhibit relocation to a larger
stadium. One day, we may need to move quickly to secure a suitable site if it becomes
available and, with the CPO structure in place, we cannot plan with certainty.


Proposed Transaction

In light of the above, the Club would like to acquire the ownership of the freehold interest of
the Stadium Site so that it can take advantage if an appropriate opportunity arises to relocate
to a new site, where we can construct a larger stadium which makes good sense for the Club
and its supporters. The Club would like to achieve this aim through Chelsea acquiring CSL, and
thus the Stadium Site (the Transaction).

As I mentioned above, CPO has been unsuccessful in its efforts to raise the sums required to
purchase the Stadium Site and it was only able to acquire CSL as a result of Chelsea
advancing the Loan. The sum currently outstanding from CPO to Chelsea under the Loan is
£8,562,094 and there is intercompany debt of £10,041,943 owed by CSL to CPO
(the Intercompany Debt). The respected land agent, CBRE, has valued the freehold with the
Lease in place at £20,000.

Chelsea proposes that as part of the Transaction, it pays £8,562,094 to CPO (in consideration
of CPO assigning to Chelsea £8,562,094 of the Intercompany Debt) and procures that CSL
repays the balance of the Intercompany Debt (being £1,479,849). CPO would repay the Loan
(using the £8,562,094 from Chelsea) and would retain the balance of the Intercompany Debt
(£1,479,849). CPO would be debt-free and there would be no debt outstanding between CSL
and CPO.

No one can know how football will develop in the future, but recognising the potential concerns
of CPO shareholders regarding the size and location of any new stadium and as a sign of its
commitment to keeping the Club close to Stamford Bridge, Chelsea is prepared, if the
Transaction is approved by CPO, to enter into a legal commitment to CPO that the Club will not
complete any move to a new location prior to 2020 unless:

• that location is within a 3-mile radius of Stamford Bridge;
• that location provides a stadium with at least 55,000 seats. It is hoped that
any new stadium will comprise between 60,000 and 65,000 seats but that would
obviously be dependent on the size of the site and the appropriate planning
consent; and
• at least 10% of the seating capacity of the new stadium is made available
exclusively to families and supporters under 21 years of age.

The CPO shareholders have made an extraordinary contribution to the Club by protecting the
Stadium Site since 1993. I know everyone at the Club would like to thank them. Indeed, the
Club wants to recognise that contribution by proposing that if the Transaction is approved:

• all CPO shareholders who vote in favour of the Transaction be named in a “roll of
honour” or “walk of honour” at any new stadium to which the Club moves; and
• all CPO shareholders listed on the Register of Members as at 3 October 2011
who vote in favour of the Transaction will be given a non-assignable priority right
to purchase, subject to normal terms and conditions, one season ticket for each
share held (subject to such right being exercised in respect of a
maximum of 2 tickets per shareholder) in any new stadium to which the Club
moves, for the first season that such new stadium is used as the home ground
of Chelsea Football Club, and such right will rank generally above existing season
ticket holders of the Club.

The Club has been advised that a sale of the Stadium Site, even an indirect one, requires the
consent of the shareholders of CPO. We therefore invite the Board of CPO to convene a
general meeting of the shareholders of CPO to consider the Transaction, which will involve
amending CPO’s Articles of Association.

I must emphasise that if the shareholders of CPO reject the Transaction, then the Club would
have no option but to remain at Stamford Bridge. In that case, however, the Club would not be
in a position to finance a new stadium and would not be able to obtain the benefits a new
stadium would bring. Accordingly, I would hope that CPO shareholders, when making their
choice, will bear in mind the financial restrictions that the inability to move would impose on
the Club in the future.

Finally, it is worth reminding everyone that this proposal is a very visible statement of intent by
the Club and Mr. Abramovich that they are determined to ensure that the Club continues to
compete at the highest level of world football in the future.

Yours sincerely,

BRUCE M. BUCK
CHAIRMAN

[Keemik.]

Väga viis oleks, kui keegi nüüd paari lausega selle inglise keelese mula kokku võtaks. Tõesti, pole soovi ega aega nii pikka artiklit lugeda.


/Aitäh

[ChelseaFC]

Väga viis oleks, kui keegi nüüd paari lausega selle inglise keelese mula kokku võtaks. Tõesti, pole soovi ega aega nii pikka artiklit lugeda.


/Aitäh

Kui keegi varem ei viitsi, siis oota õhtuni. Siis on natuke rohkem aega.

[Nasfal]

Chemic - nagu mina aru sain oli see artikkel/uudis mõeldud justnimelt neile kellel on huvi ning kes viitsivad seda lugeda.

[ChelseaFC]

Ühesõnaga on nii, et on olemas selline fännidest koosnev ettevõte Chelsea Pitch Owners PLC, mis koosneb üle 10000 fännist, kel kõigil on vanadest aegadest alles paber (toonase väärtusega £100), mis ütleb, et tema on SB sissekäikude ja väljaku omanik. Kunagi, kui Ken juhtis kogu seda kaadervärki ja ajad olid tumedad, ostsid fännid selle maa seal ära, et vältida kinnisvara spekulante. Nüüdne juhtkord mainibki, et kuna hetkel on klubi heades kätes ja mingid taolised ohtud puuduvad, siis ei peaks enam selle pärast muretsema. Klubil ei ole võimalik uuele staadionile kolida enne, kui CPO on heakskiidu andnud. Kui aga klubi saaks need paberid fännide käest kätte, oleks neil praktiliselt vaba voli selles küsimuses. Chelsea on pakkunud igale osanikule £100 naela osaku eest, ehk siis raha tagasi. Lisamotivaatorina lubatakse uuel staadionil esimeseks hooajaks eelisjärjekorras hooajapileti lunastamist. Nüüd oktoobri lõpus tuleb see rahvamass kokku ja hääletatakse, mis siis saab. Minuteada oleks vaja vähemalt 75% poolthääli, et asi läbi läheks. Lisaks lubab klubi, et enne 2020 aastat ei kolita kauemale kui 3 miili raadiusesse.

Isiklikust vaatevinklist tundub just see viimane asi kahtlane. Miks kurat peab see number 2020 seal sees olema? Et kui ei leita sobivat maatükki praeguses ümbruskonnas, siis kolitakse hoopis põhja äkki? See hääletus võtab ju aega max. kuu (praeguse näite põhjal) ehk siis miks ei käituta nii, et leides sobiv maatükk, küsitakse seejärel alles fännidelt heakskiitu. Kui see asi nüüd läbi läheb, on Romanil praktliselt vaba voli ehitada staadion kuhu tahes peale aastat 2020.


Rääkides aga potentsiaalsetest maalappidest, siis läbi on käinud hetkel 3 peamist kandidaati:

Earls Court


Iseenesest oleks väga sobiv variant ning jääks vaid umbes miili kaugusele praegusest. Transpordiühendus on samuti väga hea, ning posti indeksiks jääb ikka SW, mis on kohalikele väga oluline!

White city


Iseenesest hea asukoht ja transpordiühendus, aga väga ebapopulaarne, kuna see vasakul asuv staadion on juhuslikult QPR ja see kalduks ajalooliselt välja Fulhamist või Chelseast.

Battersea Nine Elms




Minu lemmikvariant. Stamford Bridgest vaid u. 2 miili kaugusel. Kasuks räägib see, et maalapp on väga suur, mis jätaks võimaluse tulevikus veel korrigeerida. Kuna see asub just Thamesi ääres ning väga lähedal kesklinnale, saaks sellest kindlasti ka korraliku turismiatraktsiooni luua. Kujutage ette uut 65000 staadionit sellises kohas:




Lühike eesti keelne kokkuvõte siis toimuvast