Chelsea strongly defended their financial structure and have rejected any suggestion that the club's estimated debt figure of £730 million could ultimately jeopardise their participation in European competitions.

By Jeremy Wilson
Published: 10:10PM BST 08 Oct 2008

Wealthy owner: Roman Abramovich and Chelsea believe that the club's unique ownership model should be taken into account before the introduction of penalties for clubs carrying excessive debts Photo: Getty Images Uefa president Michel Platini specifically pinpointed Manchester United and Chelsea earlier this year when he highlighted the issue, while Uefa general-secretary David Taylor threatened to bring in new rules to regulate clubs' relationship with debt. However, Chelsea believe that the club's unique ownership model should be taken into account.

"Our debt is not external, we don't owe it to a bank or an insurance company, we owe it to the owner of the club who is a committed investor in the club," said Chelsea chairman Bruce Buck. "And the fact that it is characterised as debt or equity is irrelevant. I think it's even softer than soft debt. Its equivalent to equity for all practical purposes.

Related Articles

"Our objective – as it has been for several years and will continue to be – is to break, or as close to, break-even as we possibly can in order that we don't have to look to Mr Abramovich to fund us continually.

"Was Platini misinformed? As best I can remember the quotes and the context, then I would say yes, he probably didn't understand the actual financial condition of Chelsea."

Liverpool are estimated to be £350 million in debt. Chief executive Rick Parry said: "It's a complex issue, you cannot possibly say per se 'debt is bad'. If you're funding a stadium it would be inconceivable – at least until about a fortnight ago – for anyone to do it with anything other than debt. Is it an issue? Yes. Is there a one-size- fits-all solution? Obviously not."

Football Association chairman Lord Triesman also raised the issue of the Premier League's 'fit and proper person' ownership test that he regards as "ineffective". "You're opening a Pandora's box with that one," said Parry. "Are we saying foreign ownership per se is bad? Are all British owners paragons of virtue? It's one thing to raise all the issues, it's another to find all the answers."{jcomments on}

Tweet

Tweetle                      Paylaş                        Paylaş