<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Chelsea and Liverpool takeovers ALL about the money</title>
	<atom:link href="http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/1086/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/1086/</link>
	<description>Football News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 18:33:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Liverpool&#8217;s new owners are greedy bastards after all &#124; Soccerlens - Football News</title>
		<link>http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/1086/#comment-45461</link>
		<dc:creator>Liverpool&#8217;s new owners are greedy bastards after all &#124; Soccerlens - Football News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 09:15:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/15531086.html#comment-45461</guid>
		<description>[...] when we said that Liverpool&#8217;s deal was all about the money and that Gillett and Hicks had leveraged Liverpool assets and put the club in debt the same way the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] when we said that Liverpool&#8217;s deal was all about the money and that Gillett and Hicks had leveraged Liverpool assets and put the club in debt the same way the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karl</title>
		<link>http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/1086/#comment-23310</link>
		<dc:creator>Karl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 15:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/15531086.html#comment-23310</guid>
		<description>If Abramovich was really in it &#039;just for the passion&#039;, then why did he buy Chelsea of all clubs. I&#039;m not saying passion was not involved, but if it was the only reason, then surely a Russian club would have made more sense? I am interested to know what previous ties he had with Chelsea before the take-over. Why not an Italian or Spanish club?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Abramovich was really in it &#8216;just for the passion&#8217;, then why did he buy Chelsea of all clubs. I&#8217;m not saying passion was not involved, but if it was the only reason, then surely a Russian club would have made more sense? I am interested to know what previous ties he had with Chelsea before the take-over. Why not an Italian or Spanish club?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ahmed Bilal</title>
		<link>http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/1086/#comment-23268</link>
		<dc:creator>Ahmed Bilal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/15531086.html#comment-23268</guid>
		<description>Yes, I am.

However even if my math was faulty I would not for a moment suggest that Abramovich was coming to Chelsea for the club&#039;s meager profits.

Without resorting to petty taunts, let&#039;s look at it a different way, maybe you&#039;ll understand better.

Football clubs in the Premiership are hot property - they are long term investments that you can use to build your wealth and then flip in the future at a much higher cost.

Here&#039;s the thing - look at the numbers behind the deals chairmen have made selling their stocks recently. 

Then think of how much Chelsea&#039;s value has increased as a club and as a brand with regard to Abramovich&#039;s investments.

If Chelsea were to be sold now, how much would it cost?

If Abramovich sold Chelsea 5 years from now, would he recover his money? 10 times, and I&#039;m being conservative.

It&#039;s just an opinion, you&#039;re welcome to disagree with it, but please adhere to some standards of decency.

So yes, Abramovich likes football, but that&#039;s not the reason he bought the club - he bought it because he could flip it at a profit whenever he wanted to, and because no matter what happened, it would not be a loss of money.

Semantics, yes, but worth noting nonetheless. And it&#039;s no where near as ridiculous a thought as saying that a billionaire will throw money away without expecting or planning on a return. Refer to Chelsea&#039;s agressive marketing in the Far East and in the US. They&#039;re tapping that advertising baby, and they&#039;re turning Chelsea into a cash cow.

As investments go, it&#039;s a bloody good one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I am.</p>
<p>However even if my math was faulty I would not for a moment suggest that Abramovich was coming to Chelsea for the club&#8217;s meager profits.</p>
<p>Without resorting to petty taunts, let&#8217;s look at it a different way, maybe you&#8217;ll understand better.</p>
<p>Football clubs in the Premiership are hot property &#8211; they are long term investments that you can use to build your wealth and then flip in the future at a much higher cost.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the thing &#8211; look at the numbers behind the deals chairmen have made selling their stocks recently. </p>
<p>Then think of how much Chelsea&#8217;s value has increased as a club and as a brand with regard to Abramovich&#8217;s investments.</p>
<p>If Chelsea were to be sold now, how much would it cost?</p>
<p>If Abramovich sold Chelsea 5 years from now, would he recover his money? 10 times, and I&#8217;m being conservative.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just an opinion, you&#8217;re welcome to disagree with it, but please adhere to some standards of decency.</p>
<p>So yes, Abramovich likes football, but that&#8217;s not the reason he bought the club &#8211; he bought it because he could flip it at a profit whenever he wanted to, and because no matter what happened, it would not be a loss of money.</p>
<p>Semantics, yes, but worth noting nonetheless. And it&#8217;s no where near as ridiculous a thought as saying that a billionaire will throw money away without expecting or planning on a return. Refer to Chelsea&#8217;s agressive marketing in the Far East and in the US. They&#8217;re tapping that advertising baby, and they&#8217;re turning Chelsea into a cash cow.</p>
<p>As investments go, it&#8217;s a bloody good one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sid</title>
		<link>http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/1086/#comment-23267</link>
		<dc:creator>Sid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:45:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soccerlens.com/chelsea-and-liverpool-takeovers-all-about-the-money/15531086.html#comment-23267</guid>
		<description>Are you seriously suggesting Abramovich arrived at Chelsea for the potential of money? Amazing!

No club in the world turns over more than Â£200m from all sources of revenue. What profit would you expect - 10% ?

FYI when Abramovich arrived he spent a lot, but his other investments gave him Â£700m that year - he made a hefty profit - and is now worth more than double what he was when he arrived. You think Abramovich was after some Â£20m in 5 years time when Kenyon dreams of making an imaginary profit?!

This has to be the outright most moronic suggestion I&#039;ve ever read. I didn&#039;t realise anyone could fail &quot;Business 101&quot; but you seem to have managed it. Look for the remedial class - there&#039;s a seat with your name on it waiting for you.

What a retard!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you seriously suggesting Abramovich arrived at Chelsea for the potential of money? Amazing!</p>
<p>No club in the world turns over more than Â£200m from all sources of revenue. What profit would you expect &#8211; 10% ?</p>
<p>FYI when Abramovich arrived he spent a lot, but his other investments gave him Â£700m that year &#8211; he made a hefty profit &#8211; and is now worth more than double what he was when he arrived. You think Abramovich was after some Â£20m in 5 years time when Kenyon dreams of making an imaginary profit?!</p>
<p>This has to be the outright most moronic suggestion I&#8217;ve ever read. I didn&#8217;t realise anyone could fail &#8220;Business 101&#8243; but you seem to have managed it. Look for the remedial class &#8211; there&#8217;s a seat with your name on it waiting for you.</p>
<p>What a retard!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

