In the past month or so, I have seen 23 news about Werner's approach to joining Liverpool, and 7 analyses of his role in the Klopp system. Suddenly, Sky Sports said: "Chelsea is about to activate Werner's penalty clause."
And just a few days after Sky Sports broke that Chelsea had activated Werner’s penalty clause, Chelsea confirmed Werner’s joining.
On this day, we again remembered Abramovich’s fear of being ruled by the ruble when Abramovich had just arrived in England over time.
What's more interesting is that when Chelsea announced the financial report for the 2018-19 season at the beginning of the year, it still gave an answer like this: "Sorry everyone, after two years of turning a loss to a profit, we lost another 100 million this time."
Facts have once again proved that losses are not counted in front of Abu.
In the 2016-17 season, after years of hard work, Chelsea finally managed to turn around after tax in the Abramovich era.
In the 2017-18 season, the Blues continued to go further in their independent, long-term, and sustainable operations, and achieved an after-tax profit of 60 million pounds.
However, as soon as the financial report for the 2018-19 season came out, they once again turned into a loss and lost a huge amount of 96 million pounds. 96 million, this rounded up is really 100 million.
For another club, a loss of 100 million in a single season will definitely be verbally criticized by reporters from all walks of life. The media will be full of "what to do with financial fairness". But when the protagonist turned into Chelsea, not only did public opinion not blow, but the official website also said very calmly: "Although there are a lot of losses, these are within the normal business scope. The club’s long-term profitability and FFP compliance goals will not Any impact."
Why is this happening?
Let us first disassemble Chelsea’s official financial report last season to see where the ups and downs of 156 million came from a profit of 60 million to a loss of 96 million in just one year.
What’s interesting is that, as I wrote in the summary of major clubs’ financial reports, Chelsea’s current operating status is really very stable, and many minor changes can be roughly offset. In the end, the gap of 156 million pounds can basically be divided into four. Chunks.
Add up, no more than 156 million. Next, let's talk about them one by one.
First of all, the account shows that Chelsea’s transfer fee profit for the 18-19 season is 60.5 million. Although it seems to be a lot, it is still far behind the previous year. After all, the bulk of the goods they shipped last season was only Courtois, and the price of this bulk was "only" 32 million euros. Fabregas's 8 million to Monaco was already ranked second highest.
But in the 17-18 season, the Blues sold out famous stars such as Costa, Matic, and Quadrado, and sold a large number of youth players such as Aker, Traore and Chaloba. In a single season The transfer profit reached 113 million pounds.
How did the transfer fee profit come from? Selling price-the cost of the transfer fee that has not been fully amortized when it comes. For youth players, there is no transfer fee when they come, so how much money they sell can make a profit in the year.
In the past ten years, Chelsea’s total transfer fee profits have exceeded 450 million pounds, most of which come from the accumulation of youth training players’ rental fees and transfer fees for leaving the team. Without these, Chelsea would never pass the fiscal fairness review. So, now you know why "taxi" is the basic team strategy at Stamford Bridge, right?
Excluding the "non-operating profit" of transfer fees, Chelsea's operating income last season basically remained unchanged from the previous season.
Of course, if you don’t move forward, you will retreat. To some extent, this constant can be regarded as a step backward. However, the reason for the retreat is not that the uniforms of the Blues are not strong, but that they have no Champions League to play in the 18-19 season.
Although Chelsea made great strides in the UEFA Europa League and finally won the championship, they only got 46 million euros in share from UEFA. In contrast, the Premier League semi-finals such as Liverpool, which participated in the Champions League, benefited from the growth of the new broadcast contract and received 93-110 million euros respectively. Between the UEFA Champions League and the European Union, there is such a huge gap.
Second, special costs increased by 20 million.
The main reason for this part is also in athletics, that is, Chelsea fired Conte ahead of time and paid a total of 26.6 million pounds to the Italian coach and his team. In other areas, the special cost decreased slightly, so it added up to 20 million in the end.
Hmm... The speculation of the coach may also be regarded as "ordinary cost" for Chelsea in the Abramovich era.
Again, player salaries have risen by 40 million.
This part is not specifically developed in the financial report. I personally estimate that it is because of the addition of new players such as Kepa, Pulisic, Jorginho, and the renewal of Giroud, Pedro, Christensen and others. The additional items brought, this should belong to the normal phenomenon of the continuous expansion of the football economy. On the other hand, the reason is estimated to be related to the Europa League winning bonus.
Finally, the transfer fee amortization increased by 44 million.
This basically reflects the status quo of Chelsea's daily operations: don't panic, and invest steadily.
In recent seasons, which club has been the protagonist in the transfer market?
Faced with this problem, fans will definitely come up with names like Paris and Manchester City first, and if you think about it carefully, they will probably mention Barcelona. Anyway, few people think of Chelsea.
Compared with the momentum when Abramovich first arrived, "I don't care if you want it or not, anyway, what I want is mine", Chelsea is quite "retracted" today. But this kind of convergence does not mean the careful calculation of some city team owners, but the continuous investment at self-paced.
The core evidence is the continuous increase in the transfer fee amortization mentioned above.
The so-called transfer fee amortization means that the transfer fee will be accounted for every year on average according to the length of the player's contract. Therefore, the trend of the transfer fee amortization in each season can basically be seen whether this team is expanding or making minor repairs in the transfer market.
From 2008 to 2015, Abramovich has experienced major blows such as the subprime mortgage crisis and the ruble cliff, and his assets have shrunk by more than half from the peak of 22 billion US dollars. Coupled with the proposal and implementation of financial fairness, his investment in Chelsea has gradually become more rational, and the club has begun to transform itself into self-financing.
In the incredible Premier League season of 2015-16, Chelsea only scored 50 points and ranked tenth in the league, which was the team's worst record in 20 years. The reduction in investment by Abramovich is certainly not the biggest reason for this result, but it has sounded a wake-up call for him: The building I have worked so hard to build must not collapse easily.
Since then, Chelsea is still struggling to be self-financing, but has established a major premise for this process: does not affect the team's own combat effectiveness supplement.
The most direct evidence is that from the beginning of the 16-17 season, Chelsea’s transfer fee amortization ranged from 88 million to 124 million and then to 168 million, basically reaching a new level every year. If you still don't understand what transfer fee amortization is, then the following change trend of net transfer investment can also draw a similar conclusion.
In short, Chelsea has returned to the road of continuous reinforcement of the lineup since 2016. But this path is not Abramovich's early days of spending a lot of money, but a brand new version of "regardless of how the outside world changes, keep pace."
On the one hand, the pioneer of Jinyuan football did not continue to play the role of "price up". In the new era where the transfer fee of famous stars is often hundreds of millions, their only contact with Mr. Yuan is to sell Hazard to Real Madrid. But he was willing to spend money when necessary. For example, Courtois immediately invested heavily in Kepa after he left, and after the epidemic, it was generally believed that the transfer market would be collectively downturned by Huverner. Haverts and Chilwell.
On the other hand, Chelsea has kept at least 30 million pounds in cash over the years, and the accounts at the end of June 19 showed that there were 37 million. With 70% of European football's tens of millions of transfer fees being paid in installments, this figure is sufficient to ensure a quick deal when there is a suitable goal.
Let the wind and rain beat you, I won't move. Regardless of the noise or silence, I just care what I want.
To some extent, this may be the highest state of "rich and willful". And Chelsea can achieve this unique stability that is unique in European football, and it is inseparable from the support of a person behind it.
That person can only be Abramovich.
If there is not enough cash in stock, and you have to activate liquidated damages when you encounter your favorite target, or the seller insists on receiving the cash immediately or selling to others, what will the club generally do?
The answer is simple: borrow. We look for flowers, they look for the bank.
Including Real Madrid and Barcelona, the giant clubs actually have the participation of banks behind the large acquisitions. For example, when Ronaldo and Kaka joined the Galaxy Battleship, the main funder was Santander, and the clubs will gradually use various revenues. Repayment. Even Bayern, which has always been financially healthy, will actually borrow and repay short-term loans from time to time. "Zero debt" is just a misunderstanding by laymen.
包括皇家马德里和巴塞罗那在内的大型俱乐部实际上都有大型收购背后的银行的参与。例如，当罗纳尔多（Ronaldo）和卡卡（Kaka）加入银河战舰（Galaxy Battleship）时，主要出资人是桑坦德（Santander），俱乐部将逐渐使用各种收入。还款。即使是一直财务状况良好的拜仁，实际上也会不时借入并偿还短期贷款。 “零债务”只是外行人的误会。
But at Chelsea, when you are in a hurry, you never go to the bank, but to Abu.
When different media count club debts, you often see two completely different calibers in the Chelsea line.
One is: Chelsea has no financial debt at all and is the club with the least debt in the entire Premier League.
The other is: Chelsea now has a debt of 1 billion + pounds, the most in the entire Premier League.
What's interesting is that these two statements are correct, but the statistical caliber is different. It seems that the reason for the contradiction lies in the money Chelsea owes, basically the creditors are their boss Abu. I owe more and more, and I have never paid it back.
In the past decade or so, Abramovich has continued to support Chelsea in the form of very low interest or even interest-free loans. Even when his personal assets were shrinking, all this has not stopped.
It can be said that Chelsea slowly learned to walk on the road of self-management with the continuous financial support provided by Abramovich.
In the 2018-19 season, Abramovich invested a huge investment of 266 million pounds in Chelsea, of which 19 million cash was directly included in the owner's equity in the form of capital increase, and the remaining 247 million became the club's arrears to the boss.
As a result, Chelsea's current account owed Abramovich has reached 1.4 billion pounds. In theory, Abramovich can ask the club to repay these debts within 18 months of issuing the written notice.
But do you think Abu will do it?
From Ziyech to Werner, why did Chelsea not even give the fans a chance to climb the tree? As soon as the news broke, it was close to the official announcement? Because they have always maintained sufficient funds to prepare, they will immediately make a move when they see it.
When the football circle as a whole has been severely hit by the epidemic, why can Chelsea fly against the wind and become the protagonist before the transfer window is opened? Because their business strategy is hardly affected by external influences, there will be some subsidies anyway.
This is the stability and happiness that Abramovich brings. No matter where Chelsea is, he will never get lost.
This is the happiness that every fan wants.