With January transfer window less than a month away, Chelsea have the opportunity to capitalise on real momentum on the pitch for the first time in the post-Roman Abramovich era.

After Sunday’s 3-0 win over Aston Villa, Chelsea are now only behind 2nd-place Arsenal, with whom they have an identical record, because of quirk of the Premier League’s ranking rules.

After points, goal difference, goals scored, and head-to-head record, Enzo Maresca’s side only trail Mikel Arteta’s because they scored fewer away goals in head-to-head meetings.

That is hardly surprising given that Chelsea won’t play at the Emirates Stadium until March.

In any case, the Blues have defied expectations for a season that, once again, started with a summer transfer window that appeared turbulent from the outside.

Chelsea actually had one of the more modest net spends in the division, with a balance of around negative £35m.

ClubDeals InDeals OutIncome (GBP)Expenditure (GBP)Net (GBP)Manchester City79£112.66m£19.98m£92.68mWolverhampton Wanderers1913£89.89m£59.45m£30.44mEverton FC910£66.84m£40.11m£26.73mCrystal Palace1515£80.46m£62.08m£18.38mNewcastle United1012£60.88m£54.49m£6.39mLiverpool FC1212£37.55m£33.56m£4.0mNottingham Forest2127£69.27m£84.29m£-15.02mFulham FC1011£54.97m£73.15m£-18.18mBrentford FC1113£59.53m£78.22m£-18.7mArsenal FC1013£66.95m£87.01m£-20.06mAston Villa1818£115.86m£140.78m£-24.93mAFC Bournemouth1320£52.81m£83.39m£-30.59mChelsea FC3125£158.2m£190.56m£-32.36mLeicester City1410£28.28m£68.75m£-40.47mSouthampton FC2713£33.23m£93.6m£-60.37mTottenham Hotspur1616£44.18m£118.93m£-74.75mWest Ham United1414£35.76m£115.38m£-79.62mManchester United1214£82.3m£171.39m£-89.09mIpswich Town1615£1.32m£101.07m£-99.75mBrighton & Hove Albion2221£38.58m£184.73m£-146.15mFigures taken from Transfermrkt – Exchange rate (€ – £) as of 02/12/24

However, the infamous ‘bomb squad’ treatment of the likes of Raheem Sterling, begrudging departure of Cobham graduate Conor Gallagher, and the sheer number of ins and outs gave a chaotic impression.

There is clearly at least a degree of method in the madness that has characterised the reign of the owners, Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital.

Player trading has always been a focus area, and the current regime think the more than £1bn they have spent to date will pay dividends in the future.

And even with Boehly and Eghbali at loggerheads in the boardroom, it seems like their financial commitment to the club is as solid as it has ever been.

Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly issue £80m shares

While Boehly has been the public face of the new ownership since May 2022, his personal stake is in fact only a modest 13 per cent.

Diagram illustrating the ownership of Chelsea, split between factions led by Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali

Granted, his faction in the boardroom also includes allies Hansjorg Wyss and Mark Walter, but the Clearlake group still represent the most powerful voice behind the scenes.

However, whatever their differences, it seems that the two groups are not changing things in terms of their capital commitments.

Paperwork filed with Companies House at the end of last week shows that they have pumped another £80m into the club – or, more accurately, parent company 22 HoldCo – via a share issue.

Chelsea share issue from Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly

Share issues are typically used to fund day-to-day operation costs such as paying wages and staggered transfer instalments.

Given that the Premier League have now made soft loans (interest-free loans from shareholders) subject to fair market value constraints, expect to see more of this funding model going forward.

Incidentally, it is the second such share issue that Boehly and Clearlake have filed in the last few months, with Chelsea also receiving a £190m injection in October.

PSR constraints: Can Chelsea spend this January?

The £80m capital injection could theoretically free up more funds to spend in January, but can Chelsea afford to push the envelope with PSR margins seemingly razor thin?

An infographic explaining how PSR (Profit and Sustainability Rules) work in the Premier League and UEFA

On face value, Chelsea are miles over the Premier League’s allowable loss limit of £105m over a rolling three-year period.

However, the intra-company sales of the women’s team and two hotels at Stamford Bridge have given them more breathing space.

If reported figures are correct, those deals alone may have offset Chelsea financial losses in recent years by £250m – although that depends on which financial year they are registered.

Those sales are recognised by the Premier League but not by UEFA, who have their own spending rules in place.

But given that European football’s governing body appear to be handing out only token fines for breaching the rules, Chelsea can expect to avoid major punishment in that regard.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply