Earl Hafler Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 It just further illustrates the need for us to move. It'll be a pity about Earls Court...quite like that area.
Stevie H Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 apparently on one of abramovich's first visits to london he was flying about in his helicopter scouting out land for chelsea's new training complex. he wanted to buy st. james' park, which is effectively the back garden to buckingham palace.
Earl Hafler Posted January 20, 2006 Author Posted January 20, 2006 apparently on one of abramovich's first visits to london he was flying about in his helicopter scouting out land for chelsea's new training complex. he wanted to buy st. james' park, which is effectively the back garden to buckingham palace. " We can have that as the ground and then i can move into that big house over there "
Guz Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 They probably wont fill it unless they reduce the ticket prices.
Tosh Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 They probably wont fill it unless they reduce the ticket prices. why worry about filling it If you have that kind of cash, and a footy club as a hobby, it's not as if he'll ever make a turn, is it?
RP Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 Does that article imply that the Earls Court site is many times bigger than Stamford Bridge, yet Stamford Bridge site is worth more? I appreciate that the land value at Stamford Bridge is higher than Earls Court, but not a multiple. What bit of this am I missing?
Michael Posted January 20, 2006 Posted January 20, 2006 I remember hearing a story once, probably apochryphal, that the name of Chelsea FC was owned seperately by someone else and that if the club left Stamford Bridge, they could no longer use the name. Anyone else know this?
stressederic Posted January 21, 2006 Posted January 21, 2006 With RP on this. If the Earls Court site is so large then it will be worth more than the Stamford Bridge site. Don't think there is much mileage in this story at all. Mind you, a Chelsea FC locked into massive redevelopment plans and totally dependent on the existence of Mr Abramovich sounds great to me... Oblivion beckons. You can almost see the specter of Putin hovering in the background, biding his time.
Earl Hafler Posted January 21, 2006 Author Posted January 21, 2006 1 - How? 2 - Earls Court is a fecking dump 1 ) We're ' losing ' money to Man Utd every home game. Soon it'll be the same with Arsenal and Chelsea. I think we have to move.2 ) I like the area.
mm2259 Posted January 21, 2006 Posted January 21, 2006 I remember hearing a story once, probably apochryphal, that the name of Chelsea FC was owned seperately by someone else and that if the club left Stamford Bridge, they could no longer use the name. Anyone else know this? Chelsea Pitchowners Organisation I'm sure Abramovich could do some sort of deal with them if he needed to........
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now