kembo

Members_2012
  • Content count

    2,390
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kembo

  1. Quick Jokes

    And God promised men that good and obedient wives would be found in all corners of the world. Then He made the earth round...and laughed and laughed and laughed...
  2. Quick Jokes

    The Husband Store A store that sells new husbands has opened in Manchester, just off Deansgate, where a woman may go to choose a husband. Among the instructions at the entrance is a description of how the store operates: You may visit this store ONLY ONCE! There are six floors and the value of the products increase as the shopper ascends the flights. The shopper may choose any item from a particular floor, or may choose to go up to the next floor, but you cannot go back down except to exit the building! So, a woman goes to the Husband Store to find a husband. On the first floor the sign on the door reads: Floor 1 - These men Have Jobs. She is intrigued, but continues to the second floor, where the sign reads: Floor 2 - These men Have Jobs and Love Kids. 'That's nice,' she thinks, 'but I want more.' So she continues upward. The third floor sign reads: Floor 3 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, and are Extremely Good Looking. 'Wow,' she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going. She goes to the fourth floor and the sign reads: Floor 4 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Good Looking and Help With Housework... 'Oh, mercy me!' she exclaims, 'I can hardly stand it!' Still, she goes to the fifth floor and the sign reads: Floor 5 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Gorgeous, Help with Housework, and Have a Strong Romantic Streak. She is so tempted to stay, but she goes to the sixth floor, where the sign reads: Floor 6 - You are visitor 31,456,012 to this floor. There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please. Thank you for shopping at the Husband Store. PLEASE NOTE: To avoid gender bias charges, the store's owner opened a New Wives store just across the street with the same rules. The first floor has wives that love sex. The second floor has wives that love sex and have money. The third floor has wives that love sex, have money & like beer & football. The fourth, fifth and sixth floors have never been visited.
  3. Moyes 5/4. Mourinho 15/8 Poyet 3/1. Moyes is, from a Chelsea perspective, an almost unknown quantity which equals risk.However, a good record in the PL. I rate him. Jose is known. Problem being control and internal politics. A few heads will have to Emenalo before Jose turns up. Poyet a great player for us but without PL experience. Too much of a risk.
  4. Sounds like someone is trying to say Chelsea want it even though it's not really possible wihtout a lot of issues being resolved.
  5. I have looked at the resolution and it clearly states "the sale and trasnfer by the Company to Chelsea FC PLC of the entire issued share capital of Chelsea Stadium Limited".. Chelsea Stadium Limited being a company registered in Scotland
  6. If there are dodgy dealings I see no reason why they should not be investigated. The entire share capital of Chelsea Stadium Ltd was going to be purchased isn't that a takeover?
  7. I agree with the comments concerning LBHF. PR At the end of the day the club need to come up with a proposal that satisfies the CPO. THE deal clincher will be the replication of the freehold rights etc of any new stadium as currently held by the CPO. No where or when just that. We all follow the Chelsea over land and sea, and river and borough.
  8. I think it was just a case of counting up all the proxy votes, seeing how those votes had gone and knowing who was in attendance at the GM.
  9. Some right crap being written on here. Not sure how some old codgers can stand it. ho hum. Every older fan I know is painfully aware of how old our fan base is. A new/expanded stadium may not resolve that but hopefully the pricing structure will be such that it will. Ric; I am not a mug. I bought a CPO share in 2007 because I saw what was coming . If I had had the money in 1993 I would have bought one then. Every other fan in the football league would want what we have... a truly powerful say in OUR club's affairs. I say OUR from an emotional perspective. From a business perspective the club's proposals made absolute sense to the club. Emotionally it was a slap in the face to the CPO. Get it? They didn't and that was a shock. Richard King having resigned may leave a vacant space to be filled by a CPO member e.g. Paul Todd who is neither stupid or a dinosaur who would never contemplate a move from SB.
  10. Not quite sure what you mean by "fallacies"? Assuming misleading or flawed; I was just stating what someone said. Forgot to put .. "at the next meeting" If you are referring to the lack of will. That is my opinion. I have yet to see any evidence of what the club has done in terms of its aproach to the council as to what they would and would not accept, if anything, in terms of expansion. I would add that Mr Buck did seem to find it diificult to deal with some questions concerning expansion of the current site. He did of course advise that the problem was one of ingress and egress and expansion was limited as a result. Somone also advised that the council had also actively ought discussions with the club regarding how to expand the ground. From memory this may have been in the 80's/90's when Bates was taking about a train station behind the East Stand. If anyone else went perhaps they can confirm/correct my recollection. The club has made a mistake in how this has been handled. We are all on the same side and they need to come back with a new proposal which after discussions with fans groups ar emore likely to succeed
  11. Just got back to Nottingham after having attended the meeting. It was a shock to hear that 20 people had purchased £200,000 worth of shares. Incredible that anyone thought they would get away with this. It was a shock to learn from Mr Buck that in the event of a NO vote that there is no Plan B. Not sure if that is true. I would be stunned to hear that it was and disappointed that a "firm" sorry club with a multi million £ turnover didn't have a plan B. It is highly likely that the current board will resign if the mood of the meeting was anything to go by. I will be going to the AGM which may prove to be just as interesting. Assuming that the club haven't come back with fresh proposals before then. Where there is the will there is a way. It is clear that there is a lack of will to develop SB. Someone requested that in the even tof a NO vote that a representative of Hammershmith and Fulham council planning dept be present to find out what they woudl accept in terms of expansion. For avoidance of doubt I voted NO. Not because I am against a move...
  12. Let me add that not moving will give BB etc the excuse to raise ticket prices.
  13. Of course if I was of a devious nature I would think that a no vote is precisely what the club might want, in the first instance. The pressure from all corners for a move is quite considerable. A no vote could then be followed by the CPO going to RA asking for a deal. A no vote with caveats (no but we don't mind moving to the right place) will give them the evidence that a move from SB is no longer a minority unspoken viewpoint. RA can then be the saviour and say if its Battersea you want then okay I will put in anything extra required. Battersea in my opinion will be an opportunity for a truly iconic stadium for the pride of London. I will still be voting no but I thought the above would give some food for thought.
  14. I am of the opinion that RA is totally committed to the club. Why is the club driving this? At a guess they have had an offer they can't refuse for SB and they have found a spot for a new stadium which is ideal. Who is the offer from? Who knows? Probably not a company which RA is involved or connected with. What are your thoughts Pete?
  15. Link to The Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/deceased-fans-still-listed-as-chelsea-pitch-owners-2369066.html It occurs to me that this could have been a flag raising exercise to test the reaction. From a PR perspective I would say its going to be a disaster. It could also mean Buck going unless he states quickly that he will not be voting on the issue. Interestingly though it will have been noted that it is likely that most CPO's are not against a move. Battersea will be the favourite as it is/was Chelsea heartland. Two icons of London on the same site.
  16. I'm not bothered about the money. Note any excess over the building costs of a new stadium that the CPO got on the sale of the site etc I suggested should be used to subsidise tickets for 11-21 year olds. What I'm bothered about is Chelsea FC, what makes us Chelsea and not money.
  17. Why on earth would Buck want to buy shares in CPO? Yes he is entitled. Of the votes to be cast I would be really interested to know what % his may form. I wpould be interested to know who else has recently bought 100 shares at a cost of £10,000. Conspiracy? No just good planning. As for the site valuation. What a load of tripe, £20,000 like heck. SB is located in a prime area of london. I thought I was being conservative.
  18. It has been alleged that Bruce Buck has purchased 100 CPO shares. Stitch up in the offing? At the moment the CPO have been offered £1.4million plus the loan being written off so a total of say £10m. If the value of the site is say £500m and the value of the name Chelsea FC which CPO's in effect own is say £100m = total £600m. Cost of new stadium say £300-400m. Difference £200m. Chelsea offer £10m v sale of site £200m. Say 15,000 CPO shares = £13,333 per share. Or Chelsea FC PLC offer of £100 per share. You could up that to say £666 if you include the loan write off as proceeds. If we are going to move how ****ing stupid do they think we are? If we are going to move then the site should be made available to the highest bidder which may also increase the sale proceeds. What we then do with the proceeds is up to us. Investing part or all of it in the new stadium would give us a lot of control. Plus a payout to the CPO if that is what they want bearing in mind that if we move from SB that is the end of the CPO. Subsidising tickets for 11-21 year olds for however long till the money runs out would be worthwhile. Offering the CPO shareholders back their original investment is insulting in the extreme and at the same time takes me back to my original point. Stitch up in the offing? If anyone on here is or knows anyone working at Deloittes please pm me.
  19. Buck has a foot in both camps. Can you see any problem with that? The CPO can issue as many shares as it likes. The name Chelsea FC has a value beyond the physical value of the stadium. A club run by fans for the fans e.g. FC United of Manchester, AFC Wimbledon doesn't strike me as rdiculous but instead a worthwhile aim.
  20. There is the disinct possiblity of a stitch up at the CPO meeting. Bruce Buck allegedly purchased 100 CPO shares at a cost of £10,000 within the last 18 months. Bearing in mind that the CPO does not pay out dividends and is effectively a not for profit company then why would he do that? Personally the more I think about it the more I think that the CPO should vote no and propose a different deal which involves Chelsea FC PLC going to, say Old Oak Common and the CPO starting a new club within 3 miles of SB. The CPO is sitting on assets that are worth a fortune. This is an opportunity to create a club run by fans for the fans.
  21. Quite right. The resolutions to amend the Articles of the company(CPO) to allow a sale of the assets. Once those assets are sold there is nothing the CPO can do about anything in the future.
  22. I am prepared to say yes. Yes to what though? More detail and a lot less rush about this decision imo.
  23. The whole point about the loan to the CPO is it can never be demanded to be paid. Its a never ending loan no matter who owns the right to the debt.
  24. I'm a CPO. I have read the document and a few things jump out at me:- 1. 3 miles radius until 2020. 2. A brick with my name on it. 3. A loan of £10m which never needs to be repaid. 4. £100. 5. Current site valued at not very much. 6. Fist option on season ticket. I'm no mug. They are trying to bribe me. Crass. I feel as if someone is trying to rush me into a decision. A decision made in haste is repented at your leisure. The freehold and the naming rights are two separate assets. RA and Buck want that name. I agree that for the club in its present format to be as self-sufficient as possible then a new stadium is required. Battersea looks a real possibility. Of course this could scare the crap out of the council so that they give the club the planning permission that it needs. First thought if there is a YES vote: CPO with no debt; a lot of rights (with regard to the new stadium for example) and, in particular, cheap tickets for fans aged 11-21. The CPO with a huge pot of cash as a result of selling the naming rights I.e. Chelsea FC. The CPO still owning the freehold that it currently holds. A new club called whatever run for the fans by fans like FC United of Manchester or AFC Wimbledon preferably at Stamford Bridge but I need to think a bit more about this. The cost of running the stadium needs to be ascertained. Chelsea AFC could take at least twenty years to get back into the top flight.
  25. Non Chelsea: Premier League

    My understanding is that Wenger has had a chat with the FA and asked for more myopic refs.