How Chelsea broke the transfer market

Try The Athletic for FREE for 30 days: theathletic.co...
📗 Tifo's new book, "How to Watch Football" is now available internationally: linktr.ee/tifo...
Chelsea’s recent transfer activity has been like nothing seen before in football. It seemed financially impossible. Breaking transfer records, with no guarantee of making that money back, with no guarantee of Champions League football. How did they manage it?
This is the story of how Chelsea took advantage of loopholes, spent £290m and broke the transfer market in January 2023.
Written by Liam Twomey and Simon Johnson. Illustrated by Henry Cooke.
Follow Tifo Football:
Twitter: / tifofootball_
Facebook: / tifofootball
Instagram: / tifofootball_
Listen to the Tifo Football podcast:
The Athletic UK: bit.ly/TifoPodC...
Apple Podcasts: bit.ly/TifoFootPod
Spotify: open.spotify.c...
Watch more Tifo Football: Tactics Explained: • Tactics Explained | Ti...
Finances & Laws: • Finances & Laws | Tifo...
Tifo Football Podcast: • Tifo Football Podcast
Most Recent Videos: • Most Recent Videos | T...
1 Popular Videos: • Popular Videos | Tifo ...
About Tifo Football:
Tifo loves football. We create In-depth tactical, historical and geopolitical breakdowns of the beautiful game.
We know there’s an appetite for thoughtful, intelligent content. For stuff that makes the complicated simple.
We provide analysis on the Premier League, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A, Bundesliga, World Cup and more.
Our podcasts interview some of the game’s leading figures. And our editorial covers football with depth and insight.
Founded in 2017 and became a part of The Athletic in 2020. For business inquiries, reach out to [e-mail].
Music sourced from epidemicsound.com
Additional footage sourced from freestockfootagearchive.com
#Chelsea #CFC #Transfers

[@vecterpls]

The fact two of the biggest richest clubs in the world still use fax and can get documents wrong is hilarious, even if it is intentional, still remember the Real Madrid/De Gea debacle and find it hilarious

[@benishben4364]

Well it is just as quick as using whatsapp and quicker than email, also probably for legal reason involved

[@lukemclellan2141]

​@@benishben4364 quicker than email?

[@cameronpeterson5961]

In hindsight though, the De Gea fiasco seems more and more like a Man Utd plot to keep him. Using a fax machine isn’t really an issue; not using it in time IS. The tech behind a fax machine really isn’t an issue.

[@justinwanhk]

it's surprising to me how widely fax is still used for really formal documents

[@joepiekl]

Fax works just like email anyway.

[@toji2254]

3 years from now we'll be talking about how this transfer window actually broke Chelsea, not the other way around

[@davenalunat1433]

You wish

[@Goldboy1975]

A lot depends on whether Potter can get these kids to gel and play consistently. If he does, could be great if not it could go very wrong very fast.

[@brunolondinese5857]

*6 months from now. That's as long as any Chelsea signing has before he's trashed by the fans. Even if they win a champions league, it doesn't mean a thing

[@albertonicolae9270]

Love to see the hate 💙. We thrive from this, keep hating and we’ll keep having success and get trophies. Business as usual

[@aliali-ce3yf]

@@albertonicolae9270 and *buy* trophies

[@duaneswaby622]

Very interesting strategy. I wonder how those non-CL wage reduction clauses work. Per session basis? Surely none of these players moving in January expected to be playing in the CL with Chelsea next season.

[@utsavdas1855]

Yes we did

[@paintsniffer401]

not even a Chelsea fan but my prediction is they'll win ucl this year, y'all are not seeing the vision (this is gonna sound really dumb if they get eliminated by Real Madrid 😭)

[@FH-id6xi]

They won't. Roman juju is gone and the current owner is a clown

[@leonclark8615]

Boehly was probably influenced by baseball, where players are given longer contracts sometimes over 10 years. This will be beneficial in maintaining a high transfer value and keeping the player under club control preventing them from leaving on a free. But if the player underperforms, you are stuck paying a lot of money for a player that nobody wants. It was smart of Chelsea to put in the clauses allowing a wage drop in case of bad results.

[@hungchoonghow5857]

Yes, baseball does provide a lot of pointers for professional football.

[@danielorji2309]

If the player underperforms, clauses in their contracts reduce their salaries making them easier to sell.

[@afiq358]

​@@danielorji2309 doubtful if ever in the player contract. Most likely their performance bonuses get cut if they didnt make the ucl . The players wage will remain untouched unless somehow they get relegated 😂.

[@jox831]

I was just about to say the same thing

[@MAPLERO4D20]

@@hungchoonghow5857 it’s still a professional sporting contract. I really shouldn’t imagine they’re that different.

[@concernedcitizens4110]

Well now Chelsea has 32 first team players and 22 players on loan. To balance the books they would at least need to sell 8 players but it’s tricky considering not many clubs in Europe that can afford extravagant transfer fees maybe Boehly could buy another club to offset these players and create a football group like City does considering that’s his intention in the first place.

[@kamrangreen1202]

Already being done. Strasbourg in France, looking for a Portuguese team as well

[@afiq358]

Trying to create an artificial leverage by buying a feeder club to offload their unwanted stars. Hopefully uefa put a banhammer on this which sadly they don't.

[@MasonGreenWeed]

@@kamrangreen1202 Aren't Strasbourg part of City group

[@heisenberg669]

Can you make a video on why Hungary hasn't kept a top level of football, like the Netherlands? Hungary saw a lot of success between the 30s and 50s, being a twice WC runner-up and winning Olympic Gold 3 times but they had a dramatic fall since their last gold: No big, successful player on the big leagues, their teams don't do well on European level, their national team doesn't go to the WC anymore, etc.

[@redwins8840]

Probably had to do with most of the financial focus in the eastern bloc being on east Germany and the Soviet Union but idk Video would be interesting

[@andrei19238]

Fall of socialism

[@okparaemmanuel5890]

i think alfie @hitcsevens will be a able to give you a detailed explanation if you ask

[@Namecantbeblank.]

All their good players are in RB Leipzig lol, Orban, Szoboszlai and Gulacsi.

[@jamesporter3761]

The eastern bloc affect

[@Alorio-Gori]

Ouch 😢felt bad for Hakim. Meanwhile Jorge Mendes is quite an agent 👏

[@DJLDomino]

And Benfica are quite the club given they signed him for €18m and five months later sold him for north of €120m. Great play from Rui Costa.

[@mainsmain]

​@@DJLDominohe cost Benfica 44 million not 18

[@natsudama4604]

​@@mainsmainno, he costed 18 million at the time, the rest were paid with his transfer to chelsea because they had 20 or 25% sell on value on him

[@thamsanqajantjies2228]

What we did to Ziyech was so horrible

[@aaa6072]

Works great in theory. But to think Chelsea wont have to spend significantly in the next 5 plus years is utopian. The costs will definitely pile up with changes of managers (who want to bring in their signings) and players wanting out.

[@joepiekl]

It sounds like a really clever trick, but they're only tying one hand behind their back for the next 8 years when it comes to bringing more players in. It reminds me of when teams bring in older players on big money, and then offer them 4 or 5 year contracts. In the short term, it looks like a great coup, but 4 years later, they still have a 35 year-old on the books earning money well in excess of their on-pitch contribution. Or they end up out on loan with the parent club paying most of their wages.

[@InvaderZim742]

No they're not. All the player's transfer fees in the squad are amortised. As players are sold or finish their initial contracts, they are paid off in the books, meaning new players can be bought. Amortising 8 or so players over an extra 3 years will have a negligible effect overall.

[@barrybarrybannan]

That’s why the top players being brought in are young players that are seen as important players for the spine of the club which needed to happen, reminds me of early on when Chelsea signed the likes of drogba, lampard etc

[@sinksinkswim]

@@InvaderZim742 it could potentially have an effect if they sell a player before their contract ends as any player they sell will have a higher book value due to the slower amortisation of their fees. That will hit their p&l so could potentially result in them recording a bigger loss for any year in which they sell one or more of these players.

[@Oggxb]

That last part describes Juventus very well

[@IrishSnwbrdr]

Also *crucially* (and this was in the video we all just watched), their wages are very reasonable. This means that they will be easy to move on if they flop and is quite unlike the example you gave of veteran signings who leave you stuck with a high earning underperformer who you can’t move on to another club. Plenty of clubs would be happy for a half-baked mudryk at only 97k/week if he never reaches his potential

[@hughzapretti-boyden9187]

And still didn't buy a No.9!!!

[@limmylimlimyi]

This is what I expect to happen, if The Spiffing Brit is in charge of any clubs transfer...

[@RefnRes]

People talking about karma like Chelsea did something bad. They followed the rules and as a business took on long term costs. Its worth listening to Simon Jordans explanation of why what they did wasn't wrong and how football clubs should be allowed to spend how they want as long as they're within ffp regulations.

[@danpreston564]

It’s never worth listening to Simon Jordan.

[@kill3rb339]

They wish bad on Chelsea always. Remember when they said Chelsea would get liquidated after Roman? 😂😂😂😂

[@lamlam9044]

If u are the last one to take the exploit then it gets closed. It's a genius

[@RefnRes]

@@danpreston564 Maybe not always for the football side of things but his business knowledge is spot on. Have a listen to what he says. The vids on KZbin.

[@connorlove9277]

Bro said Simon Jordan 😂😂😂

[@saysn680]

Cry now, cry later, cry tomorrow , keep crying until them tears dry

[@helloweeny]

Who let the doge out

[@Rw14884]

Completely immoral football club at the top. It will come back to bite them.

[@psychothinker4242]

Feels like every transfer window these days is unlike any other

[@collinthrash4005]

Who’s here after they spent even more this year

[@DeanWilliamDwyer]

You missed out Christopher Nkunku?

[@catchnkill]

He won't arrive until summer of 2023 when the current season ends.

[@HereWeald]

Enzo has been very very good

[@The-ur6ir]

When your spread these cost down the line, it is fine if you are sure the players you signed are suited to your footballing philosophy. When you have a bloated squad on big fees, it's likely you won't get the same fees when you're trying to sell them later. As Arsenal found out, its not easy to get rid of players on long contracts and likely Chelsea will have to pay them off.

[@tompale]

I think todd knows more than you

[@catchnkill]

@@tompale Know is one thing. And nail it is another. It is still a high risk move. The new players bring in must perform well.

[@tompale]

@@catchnkill lets wait and see when you will cry later

[@catchnkill]

@@tompale No need to wait. When the season ends, you will have two players to offload with not so long contracts, Lukaku and Auba. See how it goes. This is what I call risk. It is there. Players can play poorly and lose his market value.

[@danniwilder2198]

Spread what cost? Chelsea haven't spread any cost. Chelsea haven't done anything differently to how they've always done things. Chelsea, like most clubs, normally pay transfer fees in three annual installments & that's exactly what they've done with their recent signings. Like so many people you are confusing player contracts with paying transfer fees. Some of Chelsea's very young signings have been given 7 & 8 year contracts. This is a completely separate thing to paying the transfer fees.

[@AwakeningFromADream]

So if they want to sign further players for the next 5-8 years they have to sell first to balance the books?

[@barrypegg3070]

No. Provided they can cover the cost of these transfer in their accounts they can carry on signing players. Effectively, they have increased the "running cost" for the club.

[@Erfa02]

Yhe if not we get High income from winning things, i think Chelsea Pay 70 mil for alla new players for 7 year. And and they count in a 3 year cycle ffp, so 210 mil - each cycle, but You can have a loss of 110 mil each cycle.

[@InvaderZim742]

It was already the plan to sell players in the summer anyway. No club will spend 8 years with the same squad.

[@crypto_mbappe3056]

With the reported loss of 120mil last season and the lack of champions league money for next season; I don’t see how they will make further signings without selling when they have an amortized debts of £600mil already on their books already. The idea is good from the board is good but the planning and execution is a mess. Imagine spending €100mil on mudryk; a player you have to still develop whilst spending approx €100mil on sterling and mudueke and also having wingers like Ziyech and pulisic you can still count on at least until the end of the season. The squad building from this Chelsea board is a mess and has a very high probability of failure and that will be disastrous for their long term success. Let’s see how many players they can move on in the summer.

[@exlex2576]

I know my opinion doesn't matter but all these extremely wealthy club owners are destroying football.

[@jfedol7760]

Cry harder bruv 💙

[@bokangreacts843]

Chelsea fly to get their players and PSG sends a fax

[@gagmanius]

„Mudryk for example earns a basic wage of 97k pounds per week.“ British salary system seems to be doing fine

[@Dreath2623]

Was the secret ingredient crime?

[@shaqtaku]

You mean PSG didn't break the market when they signed Neymar?

[@ombhetwal778]

Best teams don't win teams with good chemistry perform well at least that's my theory

[@nightking8490]

Prime Barca and 3 peat Madrid had both.

[@ek6352]

@@nightking8490 and psg and Chelsea dont

[@InvaderZim742]

@@ek6352 how would you know? Chelsea won the champions league with good players, but not great players. Everything i've heard says the atmosphere in the dressing room is very good, chemistry will take time to create. These players have plenty of time on their side.

[@johnsontjose]

​​@@nightking8490 3 peat Madrid 🤔?

[@sugarkookiewithsometae4245]

​@@johnsontjoseChampions League.

[@jasonkashefi8241]

yea thats big boy american business baby

[@tukiran3953]

Enzo chelsea legend...

[@Shhanti]

Wrong! Transfer window broke Chelsea 😂

[@ashleyw6728]

Clearly GP plays football manager, we have been doing this for years to be able to spend billions

[@cesaralarcon5228]

How chelsea broke the transfer market and still had a horrible season

[@akamiguelsanchez9985]

And they still won’t get into the Champions League

[@davenalunat1433]

How about them on our cabinet?

[@InvaderZim742]

They don't need to. Football last more than one season fella.

[@floodur]

And look at them now, smh

[@ChrisRD526]

Enzo should not be at Chelsea.

[@beatzguy]

And now this has aged poorly

[@Vusi_M]

But there's no new information here. We already knew all this. I'm failing to see the point of this video.

[@liviodinaj6105]

disgusting inflation in football. interesting to see what happens when the UK interest rates go up (BoE mandate, 2% inflation, vs OVER TEN PERCENT) interest rates go up, these over leveraged clubs are really, really, really, really going to get it. Bank of England cannot tolerate an inflation rate five times what its supposed to be. Interest rates go up, end of cheap credit ends, over leveraged clubs go boom boom.

[@davidpeniel7168]

The only thing that’s left is a competent quality manager

[@mikeywallis4085]

Nagelsmann in the summer let's hope

[@myopiniondoesntmatter7068]

This whole extended amortisation thing was done exactly once in Australia's biggest football code (10 year contract for a guy who at the time was only expected to maybe play 4) and was promptly stomped out after. Funny that the wild wild west of sports (in terms of fairness where nearly anything goes financially) hadn't tried this tactic yet when its an extremely obvious way to "beat" FFP for short term gain. Its 100% the type of thing you'd expect PSG/City to do when they started.

[@dafunkyshit]

Are we talking about Gary Ablett Jr?

[@danniwilder2198]

You don't know what you're talking about. Firstly, 7 year contracts were given to players under Abramovich's ownership. Secondly, no you wouldn't have expected PSG/City to employ Chelsea's current policy of 7 and 8 year contracts because neither PSG or City had a similar transfer policy as this. PSG or City have never had a transfer policy of focusing the bulk of their transfers on 18, 19, 20, 21, yr old players from around the world. If Chelsea were signing 25, 26, 27, 28, yr old players then obviously they wouldn't be giving 7 and 8 yr contracts either. And just how pathetic is it for people to complain & whinge because Chelsea have done what they've done & they're fully compliant with the rules of the game?

[@GodotOfficial]

Chelsea were criticised for exploiting this loophole yet if it was Barca or Real that did it, everyone would have called them geniuses

[@rockaway0beach]

It's unbelievable. They found a way to introduce tanking to the Premier League

[@conrad_t]

Please just delete the club

[@lebooza3476]

Damn Ziyach was done dirty

[@ShaniAce]

That's nothing new though, I've always done that in FM. The contract length isn't even that relevant either, just spreading the transfer fee out is enough to make it work.

[@illuminousarc75]

Saka>Mudryk

[@Val_Smith]

They might have a problem selling Mudryk even with this wage.

[@olivermorning4945]

that Ziech situation proves how unprofessional Chelsea is

[@anb2456]

yes exactly, i was wondering if anyone else was going to point this out. how pathetic to send an email with the wrong attachment, the kind of mistake an intern would make. boehly has no idea what he's doing. i see a glazers/man u kind of crisis unfolding...

[@olivermorning4945]

@@anb2456 exactly mate, too much focus is on these ridiculous signings which for does not deserve any praise to cheat based on a loop hole. So much for being a fair league i guess

[@frankreynolds9930]

@@olivermorning4945 Why enquire at the last moment then.

[@Yankpats]

Welcome to American sport contracts. This is how the kings of profit bearing sports do things

[@osobad1127]

I feel like Chelsea breaks the transfer market every year. 🤦‍♂️

[@kingf4158]

Chelsea want to sell players. Callum hudson on 150k a week Mr cheeks on 150k a week 😂😂😂😂😂

[@mamchi]

Still I am not impressed. Most of these players will not be elite talents. Also Enzo transfer is not a healthy way of doing it. Benfica bought the player 6 months ago for 12M Euros and after 6 months, you pay 120 for the player. This shows how the scouting is a fail and makes the club poor both financially and inwardly.

[@Viewer41]

I'm not a Chelsea fan at all, but I think there's NOTHING WRONG with what Chelsea are doing. Yes, you get around FFP, but there's a risk that comes with that. You might end up with 5 more Winston Boagardes! 😅

[@davidsoup1738]

they're ruining football, there's a lot wrong with it

[@MahaXad]

@@davidsoup1738 Football has long been ruined. Chelsea didn't start the Galactico era. They're riding the wave like every other Saudi backed club.

[@lkking73]

Can you do a video on simon jordans crystal palace?

[@lUndercoverGamerI]

Wow! A low "basic contract, of 97K a week", you know...chump change...

[@FULANODETAL]

hope than the MONEY DOPPING WILL BE erased from FIFA

[@johnphilips5095]

Still can't believe we managed to land Enzo. Insane baller that didn't need any "period of adjustment"

[@miniman2132]

what’s difficult to believe about buying a player for £106million?

[@johnphilips5095]

@@miniman2132 cry

[@ohhimark3691]

Yeah, you waved money and he went. Not really that hard mate

[@danniwilder2198]

@@ohhimark3691 It is hard when the player's club stubbornly refuse to sell the player. Benfica didn't want the £107m, they preferred to keep the player. It was only when the player himself got involved & became vocal with his demands to be let go that Benfica started relenting.

[@Tbobobo]

FIFA and UEFA not investigating them for bleach of FFP because their boss is American.

[@luciendenis167]

Phuiiii. Saya dari masa depan. Zanussi ni lagi kuat carut, fitnah mencarut, siap menghina sultan Selangor

[@bgpilko]

Really cant stand Chelsea - they're everything that's wrong with modern football

[@linusxv181]

The also signed Christopher Nkunku in December for next season and Joao Felix on loan Let's all be real, FFP is only applicable to teams outside the Premier League

[@obpihhipbo888]

Chelsea and Man City have already been punished by FFP , so lets be real lol

[@ebnest123]

@@obpihhipbo888 Chelsea haven't been punished by FFP. Current charges are against Man City and Everton

[@pramuzainsan]

@@ebnest123 remember the tranfer ban during lampard manager era?

[@veryscarygoat]

​@@pramuzainsan that wasn't for FFP that was for signing underage players

[@sosman747]

@@veryscarygoat which is under Fifa Financial Play

[@danwilkinson3884]

Boehly took a gamble and it looks like it hasnt paid off. He wont get half of what he paid for these players, he was basically trying to inflate the market, running a football club like a stock exchange does not work.

[@MegaTimtheman]

The title suggests Chelsea have done something good. Instead they've overspent on just decent players and are stuck with these players for 8+ years even if they are massive flops

[@WopWopWopWopW]

THE MIGHTY CHELSEA

[@msmudga]

What us the risk of buying players using the 'amortisation trick'. Understand they may not perform to their expected level but what is the 'backfiring' risk?

[@Peelioka]

The cost of their transfer is amortised through their accounts across the length of the players contact, so for example a £100m player over 8 years would add a cost of £12.5m to their costs for each of the next 8 years. There are a few risks with this method. By spreading the costs now it forces the club to continue doing so in the future as if they start recognising the transfer expenses over a shorter timeframe (as they'll have to with future transfers now d'you to the change in uefas rules) it makes the expense burden in future years higher whilst only benefiting in a reduced expense burden in the short term. When a player is sold you can recognise all of the income from the transfer in full. If you come to sell a player and they're still within the amortisation window you have to recognise the remaining cost of the asset disposal at the point of sale, if the player has dropped in value this could be hugely negative and essentially trap the player at the club. For example, a £100m sold 2 years in to their 8 year contract will still hold a value of £75m in the accounts. If that player is sold for £60m then rather than recognising £75m income, as you would with a player that's fully amortised, you instead have to recognise a £15m loss. As you'd likely want to buy a new player to replace the old player you can see how this will have a knock on effect for the transfer budget / ffp. Added to that risk, if you can't sell an underperforming player you'll have to tank their amortisation expense on top of any other expenses every year until their contract expires. In my example you end up absorbing that £12.5m expense on top of the players wages. Now, for one player that might not be too bad but Chelsea have done this with most of the players they bought this year. If more of them fail than succeed at the club then Chelsea are likely to struggle to make a profit in the future, it'll be in about 3-5 years time this will hurt them if things go wrong. They might have some serious FFP problems.

[@gavinlittle9376]

Armchair football expert should really look at some basic accounting. When you talk about cost and contract length you need to have a basic understanding that in accounting the cost of any asset is spread over a number of fiscal years, until its replacement. A player is a club asset and so the end of use is the end of the contract of that player.

[@HamishNZ119]

All the focus is on how it's a profit for the books. But Boehly and Clearlake, you assume, would also be needing to turn an actual profit at some point. And that's going to be tricky when the number of clubs who can actually afford those players is limited to a handful in Europe

[@InvaderZim742]

The contract for the sale of the club dictated they can't take dividends for 10 years. It's a very long term vision. They are not aiming to turn a profit through player sales, They are aiming to raise revenue via commercial, matchday and broadcasting. The way to do that is to win on the pitch.

[@ossiaigbedo7223]

@@InvaderZim742 I don’t think they’ll do any of that. Chelsea’s stadium isn’t anything compared to the new Spurs stadium. They’ll struggle to turn a profit then get sanctioned. 39 players on their books. Boehly tried to monopolise the transfer market. You see in the states most sports have one dominant league so you get a player. There’s not many places they can go if they’re an up and coming talent. Means players don’t down tools. Here. Whilst some clubs can’t afford the transfer fees, they certainly can afford the wages. So players down tools for 4/5 seasons. Chelsea loses a stupid amount of money. Then they leave for free.

[@HamishNZ119]

@@InvaderZim742 Chelsea's matchday and commercial revenue growth is hampered by the size of Stamford Bridge. There's no room to redevelop it so if they want to grow that they need a new stadium, that's another £1-2 billion. UK TV rights values have stalled, so they're hoping the US ones do the heavy lifting. And that ignores that player sales were a crucial part of Chelsea's business model under Abramovich, and even they made losses almost every season.

[@InvaderZim742]

@@HamishNZ119 you're clearly not a Chelsea supporter if you don't know that plans to rebuilt the stadium are already well underway and it was a condition of the sale. The whole point of the new approach is to change the business model and grow revenue to be less reliant on player sales.

[@InvaderZim742]

@@ossiaigbedo7223 😂 What's to stop any player at any other club on a 5 year contract downing tools? Also, As stated. If they down tools and the club underperforms. Their wages get cut. This anti Chelsea logic is assanine. The are building a new stadium over the next few years. They currently have 32 players on the books for this reason. And it will be even less come the start of next season. Maybe do some research on the topic before opening your mouth next time.

[@aliali-ce3yf]

it all feels so cheap and unearned.............like they're just buying trophies rather than earning them.

[@InvaderZim742]

as opposed to city united, arsenal and liverpool all getting their players for free? oh wait nevermind, they all spent billions too.

[@DavidC-fk2wg]

3 years time. “Are Chelsea the new Leeds?”

[@InvaderZim742]

just like 3 years before that, and 3 years before that, and 3 years before that. etc... keep hoping though

[@kill3rb339]

Like like Chelsea will get liquidated last year? 😭😂

[@DavidC-fk2wg]

@@InvaderZim742 I’ve never thought it remotely possible until now. You’re right though I’m sure this approach that no other club has ever thought is a good idea will work out just fine for you.

[@InvaderZim742]

@@DavidC-fk2wg I'm sure the club will be just fine with an extra £60m a season on the books. Make far more in player sales every season. Thanks for your concern.

[@RightfootWestHam]

Okey, so chelsea is doing what I have been doing since FM12.

[@jediknight5600]

The only team I hate as much as Chelsea is Manchester United. I despise both entities with a vicious passion.

[@eric3peat920]

This isn’t a rebuild this is a mess

[@northernsurferboy]

nothing new the nhl and nfl teams do the same thing, if the team doesn’t win then they are stuck with bad contracts

[@anjolatope-babalola2338]

Nothing complex about this, been doing it on football manager for close to a decade noq

[@Viewer41]

Arteta was given 3 YEARS before he started making Arsenal look good after also investing in youth. Yet most idiots were calling out Potter after 3 months....... 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ Potter even had a harder job of working with 31 senior players after the owner started playing football manager!

[@stealthiscool]

Stop comparing two situations that aren’t alike

[@Viewer41]

@stealthiscool -Two big clubs in London -Two clubs that needed new managers -Two clubs that started focusing on youth - Two young managers unproven at the highest level - Arteta started off by taking Arsenal BACKWARDS (from 5th under Emery to 8th) Potter has also gone backwards to start. How are they not alike? Not very smart are you? 🤡 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

[@officerk8697]

​@adamcummins8930 Arteta won silverware in his first season, How's potter doing in that department

[@MK-it7wk]

I don’t think Chelsea’s splurge was such a bad thing. They bought young, mostly unproven players. It’ll be exciting to watch them develop. Had they have bought several world class, well established players, that would have been a different story…

[@marcbaigrie2295]

When have Chelsea ever developed anyone?

[@danwaters4139]

@@marcbaigrie2295they have one of the best academy’s in the world 🙃🤡

[@alcoyne3333333333333]

Their resale value will not rise they way the team is playing 😂😂😂

[@dimitrijejovanovic5939]

Manchester City should be taking notes

[@jkb2819]

If Mudryk is out of the squad in the next couple of years (pretty likely) his contract gets impaired down to whatever loan fees they think they can get for him. So they end up taking the full remaining cost of his transfer plus his future wages all in one go. That's why it's not a "trick", it's just a gamble, the downside of which Clearlake probably think they can pass on to the next buyer. "Amortisation means Chelsea haven't actually overpaid" has been the line being peddled for at least 5 years now. "Chelsea used to spend big on stars but are now spending big on youth so they won't have to spend again" goes back at least 10 years, I remember when they splurged on Oscar, Hazard, Mata, Schurrle etc saying they were going to build a young attacking force to dominate Europe, it didn't last. There's a reason Roman had to keep chucking the club a couple of hundred million every few years to keep things going.

[@Dreath2623]

Chelsea have the best client journalists to clear their name

[@MrMilkBR]

carai entendi nada

[@reeeee6693]

Enzo is class, Mudryk is flop

[@MrGetItIn]

Why hasn't this amortization "trick" been used before? Surely it's not because top accountants weren't aware of it

[@smileshortstpw]

probably because of the huge risk of someone turning out to be a dud and being able to just sit on the books for 7 more years

[@Butlee]

Isn't this was Barcelona was doing?

[@hb3393]

It's because having contacts that long is absolutely stupid in football. Boehly doesn't understand how football works and is just trying to run Chelsea like an American sports franchise. A couple of years down the line this is going to be disastrous

[@aliali-ce3yf]

because it can easily backfire and sink a club for a long time and don't call me Shirley

[@andrazstrmcnik2331]

Because British goverment literally stole the club away from Ambramović

[@ezarate1011]

They've just purchased ecuadorian forward 15 year old. Kendry Paez for 18mil.

[@matiasorcio]

GG

[@MjoePta]

Todd & his cronies came to Chelsea to learn how to run a football club by spending over £500m in one season and that hasnt worked for them 1 bit....sooo from the £1.75bil over 10years comittment money, only £1.25bil ia left and theres 9years left😂😂.. soon they will realise that owning a football club isnt for kids & they will realise that when they start missing UCL year after year

[@tomislavsekerija1957TN]

Plusvalenza?? No, since it's not Juventus, it's all good says UEFA.

[@sinksinkswim]

"the answer is complicated". I think you're vastly overselling the concept of amortisation. It's a fairly rudimentary concept that anyone with a basic level of mathematics should be able to understand. The real question is how was it not foreseen that this could and would be exploited? Understanding how a player's value is calculated in accounting terms is fundamental to setting the FFP regulations in the first place.

[@johnflatt1288]

I hope we get a Tifo video called the “Chelsea 8” in a few years after these signings don’t pan out. I don’t think anyone will ever top the “Garett Bale 7” in terms of bad signings and Chelsea board are more shrewd than Tottenham and their owners.

[@ebnest123]

Most of these signings have already panned out albeit early days. Enzo, Badiashile, Wesley Fofana. They just need a good manager

[@InvaderZim742]

and we hope you upload a video of yourself crying when they all succeed. Most of them are already looking great.

[@johnflatt1288]

@@InvaderZim742 chill man it was tongue in cheek and I didn’t say they were bad signings. Just think it would be funny if we had another one of those videos. Notice how I said the Chelsea board are shrewd.

[@johnflatt1288]

@@InvaderZim742 not looking good

[@natsudama4604]

​@@InvaderZim742 looking great losing 4-1 huh 😂😂😂😂

[@chiemelanwachukwu8926]

11 o'clock faxing 😂😂

[@catchnkill]

That move was crazy. Did they want or not want to loan him out? Even more bizzare thing happened. Ziyech was used as starting lineup in the immediate game after that saga. So the whole thing is to fool and make fun of PSG!

[@marius1987ism]

Zyiech was left stranded in Paris with looking for somewhere to stay 😂😂😂😂😂, excuse me , was he stranded in the middle of north pole or Paris? This is hilarious and not in a good way 😂😂😂

[@andrethomas4885]

Psg were actually at fault n tbh when a club owner is out with his advisor on deadline day to secure a £100+ million player couldn’t psg have thought this out bettr rather than get screws during the deadline day

[@muhammadah6850]

5:25 this isn’t really a looohole, if happens in day to day life. Take an example with klarna the middle man. A customer purchases something for £100 but they use klarna and pay £50 as a deposit then pay £10 (not including fees) for the next 5 month however the company selling the goods will get the full £100.

[@ahumanfromtexas]

The Dodgers spend the equivalent of a small country's gdp every year and still can't win the World Series on a regular basis. This high spending by Chelsea will get them trophies, but it will not get them regular success. It's better to have a team that functions and makes sense than what Chelsea are building, there's no clear vision to what they're doing and it's hilarious.

[@goticogordo]

the premier league keep making portuguese clubs richier and richies ever season, I LOVE IT, they put themselves in a huge hole with the reckless expending, nonsensical amounts, good for the "smaller"clubs that take advantage

[@JunaidJuX2]

PSG broke the market.. Chelsea broke the English record fee.. there's a difference lol

[@danw1086]

It's not a great strategy to sign players like Mudryk (who is absolutely pony) on a seventeen year contract to dodge FFP.

[@HotChilliePa]

Superb content

[@peteraleksandrovich5923]

FFP is worse than a joke.