Everything’s easy with hindsight. I bought my Chelsea Pitch Owners share on the 30th January 1985 on my way to Hillsborough for the quarter final replay of the then Milk Cup.
At that point I’d only ever seen Chelsea win one trophy, the 1970 FA cup … I was only four then and it’s still the earliest memory I have of my life.
So imagine standing on the terraces at Hillsborough at half time that evening … 3-0 down … gutted. The rest of that night is, as they say, history.
Yes Liverpool, history … “3-0 down, 4-3 up, then old Dougie fcked it up.” A hundred pounds was a lot of money for me then but I bought the share as we were fighting a battle to save Stamford Bridge.
It was only really thanks to the property crash in the late eighties that we ended up keeping our home … we we’re that close to ground sharing with Palace. If you’d told me that 25 years later, we would regularly get crowds of over 40,000 I’d have said you were clinically insane.
Remember those days of struggling to get 12,000 and against Cambridge at home if my memory serves me right, less than 7000 in Stamford Bridge ? My point is that a lot happens in 25 years. Will Abravomich still be our owner then ? Probably not.
Having 16,000 fans own the freehold to Stamford Bridge and the name of Chelsea Football Club gives us total protection forever. The offer from Chelsea is insulting. If they don’t build a new ground by 2020 they have complete control over where we play.
I don’t trust Bruce Buck … his last interview on Radio 5 made me cringe … an American stating his life long passion for Chelsea … where was he when we were shit?
Vote no at the AGM … it might seem trivial now but in 25 years time you could look back on it as the decision that saved our club.
Related articles:
- Vote: Who’s Your Choice As Chelsea Manager? With the news that Ancelotti has been shown the door by Chelsea, speculation is now rife as to who will be his replacement in the...
- Togetherness – Or The Bitter Taste of Success So, here we are. Vote taken; situation more-or-less unchanged. Time now, perhaps, for forces on both sides to regroup and plan their next move? A...
- An Indecent Proposal A bitterly cold, snowy, winter. An indifferent summer. A Royal Wedding. 1986 has a lot in common with 2011. It was in 1986 that the...
- Introducing Campaign55 Introducing Campaign55 – A New Initiative from Chelsea Pitch Owners’ Shareholders I’m sure that the events of last Autumn connected with Chelsea Pitch Owners are...
- Chelsea & The CPO – Survey Results A few days ago we ran a survey and asked as many Chelsea supporters as possible to give us their opinions on the proposed buy...
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
I understand wanting to keep hold of a piece of the club just in case but to compete with the others and keep the ffp happy chelsea need to sell more tickets, are you apposed to moving to a new big stadium or is it just a case of better safe than sorry
You’ve hit upon the exact reason it should be a no. You may well trust Roman and Bruce. The problem is you’re not selling out to them, you’re selling out to them and every future owner Chelsea might have.
The CPO exists for a reason, that we nearly lost our home. If you give it up now you’re betting that there will never be bad times ever again.
The CPO is unique to Chelsea and it should never go. If they want to move the answer should be simple. Show us where, show us why before we even talk and then if you do, then the deal is that the CPO get the exact same ownership at the new place as they have here.
I think that’s pretty short-sighted tbh, it’s entirely up to the shareholders what they do with their shares, but with the financial fair play about to be introduced if matchday revenue is not improved then we will struggle to compete,surely you can see that??
We all love the Bridge it’s a fantastic place but like everything you move on and stay put and accept mediocrity.
They have not even confirmed they plan to move, or to where, or when. You seem to find no problem with that. But it frightens the hell out of me. Yet they think this non-information and total lack of future plans should be the basis of everyone selling their shares, at 1990 prices! It’s laughable.
Those who agree with the “deal” on such non-terms are doing the club a disservice and doing NOTHING to safeguard its future.
Any new stadium wouldn’t be ready for several years, so Fair Play rules have nothing to do with Gourlay’s rush to get his hands on the shares without offering even a hint of what Chelsea’s future holds. PROTECT THE CLUB FROM THIS MAN – he’ll be gone, just like Kenyon, in a short while. It’s us fans who will be here long-term and we should be able to stand tall knowing we DEMAND answers before we sell the club’s name and pitch to transitory people like him.
Everything you say is spot on. This is all wrong !!! The only thing I’d add is they are not only trying to bribe us with a name on a brick on the wall , they’re also providing a threat that if you don’t vote yes you won’t get your name on a brick !! So no reward for what we did for the club all those years ago !! Total lack of respect !!!!!!!!!
I think chelsea should move or make stamford bridge bigger becuase I live in northern ireland and I havent a hope in the world to see a chelsea match at stamford bridge, the only time I can is away and I want to go to stamford bridge or to chelsea’s new home ground but chelsea should keep the name “Stamford” if they move stadiums.
For all we know, Abramovich could be seeking to sell the club to a wealthy arab. And the price would soar in his favor if there was no restriction on the land and club name – both of which would be taken care of by grabbing back the CPO shares.
He won’t sell the club? How do you know? You don’t even know if the club will move – Buck has said the club “may or may not” uproot. So NOTHING is certain. NOTHING concrete has been proposed. And it is EXACTLY that uncertainty that CPO was set up to safeguard against.
SAFEGUARD Chelsea by maintaining the strength of the fans. DO NOT GIVE AWAY THE CPO SHARES!
Richard … yes of course I can see that … I’m not opposed to a move away from Stamford Bridge … but lets have the same deal applied to our new home. The fans who own those 16,000 odd shares are the loyal heart of our club. If we find a new stadium, the majority of that number would be willing to transfer our holdings across. But to sign it away for nothing now … madness. Oh and another spin off from this idea : The club saves about £1.6 million in returning us our £100′s. To see a European away game in style costs about £500. Let’s then still have the £1.6 million as a present for our loyalty and have a draw. The winning 3200 shareholders get a paid piss up away in Europe on the club.
A lot of people didn’t like Ken Bates but this kind of thing is exactly what he was protecting us against when he set up the CPO. There is no reason to give up the freehold now, it can be done when a site is secured and plans passed by the local authority. Why does Buck thinks he needs to get the ground under Abramovic’s control first (and within 24 days!), he can get a commitment at any point with 21 days notice of a CPO EGM.
I will be there on 27 October and I will cast my two votes against this plan and I hope every other CPO shareholder does the same.
I support anyone voting AGAINST this disastrous sale to Abramovich and his cronies.
I am a CPO shareholder myself and strongly urge supporters not to let the club’s heritage be put at risk. The time to sell, if ever, is AFTER proper plans for the future are presented, NOT BEFORE!!!! Don’t be mugs – demand to see what is planned for the future before deciding anything. Selling the club’s name and home to a bunch of people who cannot even tell us where, how or when a change might take place is LUNACY!!!!! CPO was put in place to protect CFC from EXACTLY this kind of dubious deal. If you have not the loyalty to vote NO to this buyout, give your CPO share to someone more worthy.
We, the fans, OWN the club name and pitch. We OWN it. Do you know how much that is worth? A fortune. Those shares cost £100 before the boom in football, the Premier League and TV revenues and full stadiums every week. So they should be worth at least TEN or even TWENTY TIMES MORE by now, just like ticket prices have gone up over the two decades!
When Gourlay gets hold of those shares, he’ll be laughing at the fools who sold them at their 1990 value. LAUGHING. They’ll sell the land with no guarantee whatsoever that it will all be ploughed back into the football club. They’ll sell our PRIME land and shove Chelsea in Wormwood Scrubs or some such dump. Disagree? Then show us anything to prove otherwise. Where are the proposals for the future? There are NONE. They simply want to get their hands on the shares and get that ownership on the cheap as soon as possible. They want the fans’ strength cut out like a cancer. And they have probably plenty of turncoats amongst the CPO shareholders who they already know will be on their side in a hastily-convened vote. It’s crooked and it’s a sham. DO NOT AGREE TO THIS. If ever Chelsea supporters had a responsibility to stand up for the future welfare and security of the club, IT IS NOW. Bates wasn’t here forever, nor Mears, and nor will Abramovich be. It is the SUPPORTERS who are the guardians of Chelsea’s name and pitch and any share owners who sell their responsibility for £100 or even £1000, without rock-solid guarantees about the club’s future, will never be able to say “I did what was right for CFC when I was needed”.
My initial reaction upon hearing the news of the CPO proposal was a firm No, No, No. My first thoughts were almost entirely sentimental; the memories attached to the experiences I’ve had there with friends from a young age, right through my life.
While people grow up, people in our lives come and go, economies change, well everything changes yet one thing that I’ve grown to rely on (maybe wrongly) is my club and their home at Stamford Bridge.
When a proposal comes along asking a number of supporters to make decision that could change all of that without any real knowledge of specific details of what the end result will be, it’s a big ask and one that doesn’t sit well me in its current form.
If the club say that no site has been identified then why the urgency to buy out the CPO in such a short time frame? If a vote/buyout can take place so quickly then why can’t it be conducted once a genuine plan for a new ground has been put in place. This would give the CPO the option to make a much more informed decision. This is one of the major sticking points for and given either there is no plan in place or there is one that is not being disclosed, it leaves the CPO in a position where they are being asked to make a choice based on an unknown outcome.
The other question is do we need a new stadium? Demand for tickets is down across all clubs and I don’t see this trend changing unless a new pricing structure that encourages younger supporters is put in place. A missing generation of new support is a real issue and I’m not convinced the board take this seriously enough or cares enough. After all a board director has less concern over what happens in 10/15/20 years time than any supporter does. They are paid and incentivised on relatively short term goals and will most likely be long retired before the consequences of this missing generation come home to roost.
If assurances of a plan to address to the issue of ticket prices especially kids was put put in place, a credible design and location for a new ground confirmed, then we do have a discussion. I for one would be willing to consider a move from Stamford Bridge if I genuinely thought the outcome would mean a new generation of young supporters could return to watching their club on a regular basis as the status quo is not an option as far as the future of the fans is concerned.
But with supporters attached to a club for life and directors attached to a club for a career (at most) I need a whole lot of convincing.
What I don’t get is why is it necessary for us to sell the CPO and therefore the pitch and the name Chelsea FC?
If they want to move they can take us with them surely?
They must be desperate.
The obvious answers are probably right.
So..
The want to move to a new stadium to establish a financially sound and competetive club.
They want to sell SB.
They want to the football team to be called Chelsea FC.
They think it is necessary to bribe me with my name on a brick and an option on a ST to get the above.
They can’t stand the CPO because it means they don’t have total control over everything to do with the club.
I don’t need a bribe if…
I have a say in a new stadium.
The CPO owns the pitch at the new stadium.
The CPO owns the rights to the name Chelsea FC.
The CPO exists to protect Chelsea FC and the pitch upon which Chelsea FC play. Long may that continue.
The key is “Votes which are not cast will be assumed to support Chelsea’s proposals to buy the shares”.
They know that hundreds, if not thousands of shares are in the hands of people who will receive no warning of this vote, thanks to anything them living abroad at present or being dead, or not being able to register in time etc etc. The rush to get this vote done is a SHAM. There is NO NEED WHATSOEVER to rush this through, apart from the act that to do so is favorable to getting their plot passed. hose who run the CPO organization are clearly in league with CFC on this matter and should be REMOVED from their positions. If they do not represent their full membership adequately and represent their interests properly, they will be open to legal proceedings, of which I for one will be participating. This is an OUTRAGE and true supporters of the club must not let it happen. It is not an issue about moving… it is an issue about Gourlay and Co. trying to wrest ownership from the CPO shareholders through devious means. Once they have those shares, they can sell the club, with its pitch and name, lock stock and barrel, to the first rich arab to walk through the door, whether next week or in twenty years. DON’T BE FOOLS! BLOCK THIS NONSENSE! CPO shareholders only have $100 at stake here so this is not about money for them, it’s about the club’s future. Gourlay and his greedy pals won’t be around for long (just like Kenyon) and want to make their now money at any cost, and to hell with a Chelsea future in which they will play no part. DO NOT TRUST THEM!!!!!!!!!!
Well said Sir Cecil … I’ve only just found out that un-cast votes will count for the proposal. Chelsea must think we are stupid … It’s so serious that it needs a demo or a sit in … but we only have Genk at home before the vote and lot’s people are boycotting that.
To Ian (Ranter)
Funny how time fuddles the old brain cells isn’t it?
I would have probably agreed with your date, but on looking at my CPO share certificate (one of the first issued) and then checking the CPO prospectus etc, it wasn’t until 18th March 1993 that Ken Bates offered shares in the CPO.
It seems so much longer ago.
Like so many others of our ilk, I could ill afford the £100 for my first CPO share but I considered it like a charitable donation to ensure some safety and protection of the club. My underlying feelings on the way this has been raised and presented suggests the club still needs that protection until proved otherwise.
I’ve just dug out my CPO share certificate … in an old file of shite that I thought I’d never need. Like most people I’ve moved house 2 or 3 times in the last 20 years and never let CPO know my new address. So I haven’t received any proxy voting form. There must be thousands of other shareholders in the same position … I bet many can’t even find their certificate. CPO won’t answer any emails and their phone is either engaged or never answered. We’re being mugged.
If anyone needs a proxy form I can send them a copy. It is vital you attend or at least nominate someone to vote on your behalf. Richard King and Rick Granvill are the only directors who see no conflict with their earnings from the club. Contrary to the prospectus which you can download at http://www.wembleycarpark.co.uk/chelsea/prospectus.pdf
All the concerns about Abramovich selling. No one mentions what if Putin changes the structure? Worse still consider how Blackburn Rovers have turned out. http://www.blackburn.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=33138 Look at Blackburn now and with no bad conduct by their benefactor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYwf2SBWa5o
Roman does not need to do anything for fate to overtake. So why are they so anxious now to grab control of the ground if their aims are entirely laudable?
Paul – I think it was news to all of us that Rick was a Director of CPO. It certainly came as something of a shock to me. However, I very much see Rick as likely to be the voice of the true fan on the board of CPO.
You make an utterly brilliant point about the structure of Russia; I was giving this some thought over the weekend. It would only take one oligarch peeing Putin off from a very great height for him to start putting restrictions in place on utility/resource ownership (or possibly even returning them to the state, given the huge amount of money the oligarchs have made). Whilst the Abramoviches and Berezovskys have undoubtedly transferred many of their assets to safe and friendly countries, and bought much land, a sequestration of assets in their homeland would put a huge squeeze on them. The children of these oligarchs, for whom Communism is simply history rather than a way of life, are living lifestyles than 99% of people can only dream of. And if they are, to put it vulgarly, pissing it away, and their fathers’ assets diminish, this could have future implications in the case of Chelsea FC that might leave us where we were back in the 1980s.
Following on from my earlier post I have had second thoughts. There is no point in saying the CPO will still exist at any new stadium. Pointless. The whole point of the CPO is Stamford Bridge and Chelsea FC.If we are to move then it is the end of the CPO.
The CPO may be able to control the location, design and possibly some of the pricing of a new stadium.
I want a lot more detail. I also want a totally different structure to the deal.
Once the location of the stadium, design etc is sorted then as follows:-
Chelsea Plc wipes out the CPO debt.
Chelsea PLC pays us a shed load of money for the name Chelsea FC.
The CPO gets all the proceeds of the sale of the bit of Stamford Bridge that it owns.
The CPO can then invest the money in the new stadium and assuming that it will be at least £300m that should be enough. If £300m is not enough then we share the costs.CPO then charges a rent on its share.
CPO will then have a source of income and a capital sum to do with as it wishes but certainly it will have no say in the club.
I will be voting no. Not enough detail and no rush, is there Brucie?
This is a battle to save the club, after 2020 they can move anywhere & change the name. CPO share holders must VOTE NO. Any who don’t are selling the club down the river the same as David Mears did. I pray that the majority of share holders are proper supporters that realise the magnitude of This decision.
As well as making sure you vote NO at the AGM please also follow this link to tell Chelsea FC directly what you think about this:
http://www.chelseafc.com/page/ContactIframe/0,,10268,00.html
As an overseas fan, I struggle to see any sense in the opposition to the possible sell of the club name and stadium rights and relocation. Unfortunately, no business argument has been given so far from the previous opinions.
I find most ridiculous statements those arguments about possible club sell to another person and lack of interest after the owners has invested – what 800 mln pounds and have built one of the most modern training grounds and youth development structures in the world. Go figure!
It is quite clear you do not understand the situation and therefore the opinions above. I apologise but it is either that or as an overseas fan you are having trouble with your English.
What exactly is an overseas fan ? … someone who buys a replica shirt and watches the odd game on TV ? The business argument is quite clear. If one man (Abravomich) owns the freehold and the name Chelsea FC he is free to do whatever he wishes with it. What if he dies in 20 years and hid son inherits Chelsea FC ? What if his son hates football and wants to make money by cashing in on the ground and name ? It probably sounds odd to an overseas ‘fan’ but then again you probably didn’t even know who Chelsea FC were in the later 80′s and 90′s when we nearly lost Stamford Bridge and Chelsea FC forever. Why don’t you swap to supporting Man U ? … they seem to be quite successful.
Its all very ineresting however i think the speed of the proposal makes me very suspicious .
What is happeing at other clubs acts as a reminder that if the right offer comes along they sell .
Mr abromvich is 1st a buisnessman ans second a football lover .
a passion that then earns you a bucket load of cash may be to good
to resist .
my gut feeling says no
Ian Wood – one of the reasons that I stressed to the leadership of CPO last year that they should be targetting the overseas fan is firstly because there are so many of them, and secondly perhaps this would make them feel like they’ve got a real stake in the club. However, with this responsibility they would also need to be educated about why CPO exists in the first place. I feel that most of those who are in favour of the yes vote are younger supporters and those who don’t remember the bad times.
Football is cyclical. At the beginning of 1986, who would have thought that Manchester United, only good for winning the occasional domestic cup, would dominate football for 15 years, including winning an unprecedented treble? Who would have guessed how far Liverpool would fall. And who would seriously have put money on Chelsea becoming back-to-back champions of England, and winning the Double?
Apologies for appearing dumb but in order to vote yes or no, what do you have to do? I can’t follow all the documents I’ve received. Is there a simple guide of what to do anywhere?
Visit: http://saynocpo.org/