Pity.
The FA should strengthen their rules on ownership. Maybe they'll do it when they've tidied their room.
The FA should strengthen their rules on ownership. Maybe they'll do it when they've tidied their room.
-
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post. -
-
You very well know what I meanOriginally posted by Craig_H View PostYou think Abramovich did what he did to 'earn money' ???
Roman bought Chelsea to make good PR for himself and by that way earn good money in other business deals. The same reason that Sheikh Mansour bought City.
So he bought them to earn money. Before he bought Chelsea he was just another rich guy. Now he is Roman Abramovich, the owner of Chelsea.
Makes a big difference when companies consider who do they want to do business with. He is much more respected now than before he bought Chelsea.Stop the cyberhate
from now on I will skip talking about our finances. That is a promise and will save myself from looking like a 
Susan Black
Comment
-
So you think he didn't bought them to earn moneyOriginally posted by Craig_H View PostYou think Abramovich did what he did to 'earn money' ???
Stop the cyberhate
from now on I will skip talking about our finances. That is a promise and will save myself from looking like a
Susan BlackComment
-
I'm not sure he is in it to 'make' money. More like to clean money he already has.
Disclaimer: Satire, not an accusation that Mr A. is a dirty crook who stole his fortune
Football without Origi is nothingComment
-
Yes he did. There's no 'allegedly' about it.Originally posted by ChesterDave View PostI'm not sure he is in it to 'make' money. More like to clean money he already has.
Disclaimer: Satire, not an accusation that Mr A. is a dirty crook who stole his fortune.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
-
And why is some guy bankrolling Angie Macaroonia?Originally posted by Arn View PostYou very well know what I mean
Roman bought Chelsea to make good PR for himself and by that way earn good money in other business deals. The same reason that Sheikh Mansour bought City.
So he bought them to earn money. Before he bought Chelsea he was just another rich guy. Now he is Roman Abramovich, the owner of Chelsea.
Makes a big difference when companies consider who do they want to do business with. He is much more respected now than before he bought Chelsea..
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
-
-
And by staying with them he's also keeping himself in the public eye. If you know what I mean.Originally posted by Arn View PostComment
-
A part of his assets may be frozen very soon if they can find new evidence against him.Originally posted by Neil Young View Post
I think that is the main reason he is doing it.
He gave around $325m to charity between 2007 and 2010.Stop the cyberhate
from now on I will skip talking about our finances. That is a promise and will save myself from looking like a
Susan BlackComment
-
Yes Arn, Abramovich wanted to make money. So he spent half a billion quid on Chelsea.
Sure fire way to make money = spend half a billion quid.
You should be on the Apprentice, Arn.Comment
-
So basically he's doing it to get popular support, just like Abramovich when he was governor of Chukotka.Originally posted by Arn View Post
They're using their money to bolster their own positions. As ever..
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
-
Why not charge full price then leave some money under every seat?Was muß, das muß.Comment
-
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.Comment
-
Arn Vs Neil
Its the Immoveable object against the unstoppable force. Blind him with Logic Neil and he will have a retort. Just you watch
*Except Michael, who died.Comment
Comment