A life without Roman? It doesn’t bear thinking about. Or does it? Well, evidently Chelsea Chairman Bruce Buck thinks about it at least once a year. According to quotes attributed to him in today’s Sun, Buck has said:
“I think we'd be in a reasonably good state if Mr Abramovich left. However, we are comfortable — the directors of Chelsea Football Club are comfortable — that he is here for the long haul. Every year we're required to look at that. We're comfortable and we don't see it as an issue at all.”
Very interesting. I can see why they might feel comfortable. Whilst the club has consistently been making losses over the past few years, the figures have been steadily improving. Had it not been for the odd bad appointment or decision here and there (for example hiring Scolari or giving Grant a four year deal), the club probably would be edging towards the holy grail of self sufficiency by now. With the huge investment in the academy over the past five years, Buck is probably hoping Chelsea’s younger players will eventually reduce the need for significant investment in the squad in coming years.
On the other hand, it is also hard to avoid the conclusion that all the success of the last six years is down to Abramovich and that his departure would certainly have far-reaching consequences. Perhaps that’s why Buck chose the words he did: ‘comfortable’, not ‘well off’; ‘reasonably good’, not ‘very good’. Roman leaving is clearly vaguely plausible too – Buck and his team consider the potential impact each year. But we shouldn’t read too much into that, it’s standard business practice to do this kind of contingency planning and likely just a part of how the club reports to the owner on its financial growth.
That Buck is even answering these questions however could re-open the debate around Roman’s commitment to the club. This is a debate that won’t just fade away, mainly because of the Russian’s ongoing determination to keep a low public profile. But the signs are all positive: earlier in the year he halved the debt Chelsea owe him, a move the club hailed as a symbol of his commitment (although it is a move that does him no financial harm whatsoever, so I’d argue it’s a slightly shallow move); he regularly attends games; he personally intervened to both fire Scolari and hire Ancelotti. Hardly the actions of a disengaged Oligarch.
So no cause for concern…probably.
Roman hasn’t been spending freely of late – even before the recession burned a huge hole in his pocket – so maybe we shouldn’t worry about him leaving anyway? Then again, even if he isn’t investing millions maybe his wealth is an important safety blanket for the club. Chelsea fans – what do you think? I’m sure like me you wouldn’t want him to walk away…
You might also be interested to read:
I for one would be sad to see him go. Without him I seriously doubt we would have had the success we have had. He has brought a great deal of prosperity our way. I also think he has a great deal of love for the game. I think the comments from the papers about him treating Chelsea like a toy are unfair. I really think he wants to win.
I would like to see him with the club for a good number of years more.
Posted by: Michael Hepp | 08 October 2009 at 18:28
Buck and the Board do not check up on this every year because of contingency planning (though they would) but because it's a legal requirement of the Companies Act. That's also why he talks about it plainly - to avoid any accusation of not considering the subject. The accounts are only passed off because this statement is formally made, otherwise Chelsea is not a "going concern".
And when he says he's "comfortable" he doesn't mean he has a nice cushion or that we're comfortably off, he means he's relaxed on the subject of Romans continuity with us.
I'm not sure you could have misunderstood the subject any more than you have.
Posted by: HJC | 08 October 2009 at 18:56
HJC - thanks for your comment/ correction, sounds like you know what you're talking about. I'll not always get everything right (especially when I have very limited time to pull this blog together!), but hopefully will occasionally raise the interesting issues and people like yourself can come and add to the debate. It's all the better when they do.
Michael- 100% agree with you. Even if we never win anything again, he's ultimately responsible for bringing the title to Stamford bridge, something I never thought I'd see.
Posted by: Russell | 08 October 2009 at 23:11