Toggle sidebar

Transfer: 2023 Summer Transfer Window - Open Window Edition

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Peen said:
I said it’s fair to be skeptical. That’s it. Skeptical of what exactly? I don’t know. But I do know the crying conspiracies are so cringe

Click to expand...


I don't see what's contradictory about those two statements. Isn't cheeto proof that you can be both sketchy & an idiot?

Not that I do think there's some kind of Saudi-bailout-masterplan. That tweet just doesn't make sense to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scandale du Jour
The conspiracy talk is weird, I don't think anyone saw the Saudi's spending this much money before they started actually spending this much. It's not like clubs based their transfer budgets on eventually being able to sell off to Saudi's. We didn't buy KK with the thought to sell him to Saudi.

It's similar to China, where Saudi has made an abrupt and massive entrance to the market, we happen to have players we want to get rid of, that would be open to Saudi, and that Saudi would be interested in. Similar to how we benefitted from China with Oscar and Ramires.

If we didn't have a handful of MENA/Muslim players that we want to offload, we wouldn't be benefitting from Saudi.
 
Wee Baby Seamus said:
the key point here is that “the giant Saudi sovereign wealth fund invests in the large private equity firm” is not evidence of backroom shadiness beyond the level of all backroom shadiness within capitalism in 2023.

The QIA likely also invests in Clearlake. No special deals are being cut. Hell, Inter and Chelsea are at loggerheads over a billion deals right now and I reckon Suning probably has some money in a Clearlake fund. Until I find more evidence than “giant sovereign wealth fund which also owns football teams invests in large private equity firm which also owns football team”, I’m not gonna think this is anything more than capitalism being bad, and nothing specific to this.

What’s even the logic to the conspiracy? PIF invests in Clearlake. Clearlake owns Chelsea, Chelsea’s success (and by extension, asset value) is inhibited by dead weight contracts, PIF takes them off hands, Chelsea becomes more successful and therefore asset value increases? Not gonna lie, doesn’t make sense.

There’s going to continue to be the appearance (and existence of) conflicts of interest so long as investment funds own football teams because other large companies own football teams and also invest in investment funds which own football teams.

As long as private equity firms hold football clubs as “assets”, this’ll continue. Get f***in used to it I guess (it’s unfortunately not going away), but I need a lot more evidence to suggest there’s anything uniquely shady occurring here. I welcome the evidence
Click to expand...
You typed a lot without mentioning what motive the Saudis might have to pay a premium transfer fee for players that don't warrant it. They just paid a pretty fair price for Ruben Neves, but now they are going to pay significant fees for players Chelsea would probably deem to be "worthless" or of very little value in the sense that it's better to just get their wages off the books.

And sure, while they may want to buy Muslim players and pay them insane wages to attract them to the league, that doesn't stand as a point for why they'd pay Chelsea an inflated transfer fee.

I'm not saying there is for sure some collusion going on here, but it does seem very strange.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luiginb
KJS14 said:
And sure, while they may want to buy Muslim players and pay them insane wages to attract them to the league, that doesn't stand as a point for why they'd pay Chelsea an inflated transfer fee.
Click to expand...
The player's agent gets a bunch of that money. Chelsea are within their rights to demand back what they paid for him and they know these stupid teams have money. No reason to make more out of this than what it is. As soon as you hear in the market that there's a league buying up Muslim players (and that's 95% of what this is and what the point of it is), you know you have one who sucks, and you heard they called this guy's agent to see if he'll play there you're going to try to get as much out of this as you can. There's nothing else going on here. The Saudis are frankly being really stupid and teams should take advantage of this if they can. If there was something actually here I would see it, I don't see anything here except just blind baseless speculation.

They pay Chelsea the fee because otherwise Chelsea doesn't have to give them the player at all. They are under contract after all. For example if I heard they wanted Salah I would tell them to pay 300 million. Why? Well I know they have it.

As for Neves the guy has always been a money hungry douchebag. He left Porto to go play in the Championship over money so this is one of the least surprising things ever. Don't worry your team might get something out of Pepe too even though he's worth near zero so I wouldn't be complaining yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peen
why did arsenal bail chelsea out of losing jorginho for free and give us 15 million

maybe boehly paid the kroenkes
 
Didn't someone literally post that Boehly travelled to Saudi Arabia and was negotiating there? When two businesses meet up and negotiate a win-win solution, it's not a conspiracy. The investing in his funds part is kind of a red herring. Maybe they agreed that at the same time, maybe they didn't, it's not particularly relevant, it didn't have to be a tit-for-tat thing, the deal in and of itself gives both sides exactly what they want.

That still doesn't mean it isn't shifty and I can't be pissed that Chelsea's getting a bail-out. I wanted to call it a Boehl-out but only because I never learned how his name is actually pronounced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peen
maclean said:
Didn't someone literally post that Boehly travelled to Saudi Arabia and was negotiating there? When two businesses meet up and negotiate a win-win solution, it's not a conspiracy. The investing in his funds part is kind of a red herring. Maybe they agreed that at the same time, maybe they didn't, it's not particularly relevant, it didn't have to be a tit-for-tat thing, the deal in and of itself gives both sides exactly what they want.

That still doesn't mean it isn't shifty and I can't be pissed that Chelsea's getting a bail-out. I wanted to call it a Boehl-out but only because I never learned how his name is actually pronounced.
Click to expand...
PIF was already invested in Clearlake at the time Clearlake bought Chelsea, it’s not a particularly new investment. There were conspiracy theories at that time that it was secretly the Saudis trying to push for influence over another team.
 
spintheblackcircle said:
Goooooood.......gooooood.......I am liking this summer so far
Click to expand...
Will be interesting to see how it turns out. Tons of homegrown players being linked.

Alex Scott is probably the player they've been linked to that I'd like to see happen the most. I think he's a fantastic prospect who should suit Ange's system very well.

Not sure what to think of their approach at centre back. Arguably the position of most importance, but they seem to be looking for cheaper alternatives like Kilman, Maguire and Adarabioyo. I do potentially think Kilman and Adarabioyo can be diamonds in the rough that can do well for better teams but they need polishing.
 
Paulie Gualtieri said:
Will be interesting to see how it turns out. Tons of homegrown players being linked.

Alex Scott is probably the player they've been linked to that I'd like to see happen the most. I think he's a fantastic prospect who should suit Ange's system very well.

Not sure what to think of their approach at centre back. Arguably the position of most importance, but they seem to be looking for cheaper alternatives like Kilman, Maguire and Adarabioyo. I do potentially think Kilman and Adarabioyo can be diamonds in the rough that can do well for better teams but they need polishing.
Click to expand...

Are they planning on sticking to the back 5 or going with Ange's preferred back 4? If they are transitioning to a back 4 then they don't really need that many CB's in. Even if they move Sanchez and Dier out.
 
HoseEmDown said:
Are they planning on sticking to the back 5 or going with Ange's preferred back 4? If they are transitioning to a back 4 then they don't really need that many CB's in. Even if they move Sanchez and Dier out.
Click to expand...
While Ange has experience with both, I think the plan is for a back four. Will be interesting to see how that works out when the squad has offensive wingbacks like Porro and Udogie.

As for centre backs Romero is our only good one. Davies is decent in a back three. The others are all trash and should be replaced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spintheblackcircle
Scandale du Jour said:
Yes, we were rumoured to be able to spend between 300M and 400M. So far, they did not spend 150M.

So, if they want him, PSG wants to sell and Mbappé accepts to leave, it can be done.
Click to expand...
Real Madrid say they will announce the signing of Spain striker Joselu, 33, from Espanyol this week and rule out a move for Mbappe this summer. (Sport - in Spanish)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom