According to The Sun:
An offer to move near Wormwood Scrubs has been rejected due to a lack of transport links.
But the Earls Court/Olympia site two stops down the district line is owned by Capital and Counties, who would accommodate Chelsea.
Another option is White City, close to Shepherd's Bush and White City tube stations and the M40, but Chelsea are not keen.
It is believed they much prefer Battersea/Nine Elms and an iconic stadium alongside the Thames.The Telegraph and The Guardian have similar stories.
Seems unlikely. First, is there any space in VNEB not already earmarked for high rises?
Second Abramovich has got to buy Stamford Bridge from the fans' consortium which currently owns the land. As The Telegraph explains:
Chelsea are calling an extraordinary meeting of the Chelsea Pitch Owners association for Oct 27 where they will need to gain 50 per cent approval from the shareholders in attendance.
There are 15,000 shares, sold at £100 each, and 12,000 shareholders although only a few hundred are expected at the meeting.
The CPO is a unique organisation that was established in the 1990s when, as Buck put it, “there was a concern that we might be taken over by developers who would put the club out of business or require the club to move”. The CPO granted Chelsea a 199-year lease.
The idea behind the scheme was to put freehold ownership of the site into the hands of supporters and out of the reach of property developers. It cost £10 million, with Chelsea loaning the money to the shareholders who paid back £1.5 million through cash they raised.
Chelsea are now proposing to pay that £10 million, writing off the £8.5 million they are owed and the £1.5 million, back to the shareholders.
It means the fans will not make any profit out of the deal but as Buck pointed out: “Keep in mind that no one bought these shares as a financial investment. Everyone bought these shares as a way of helping the club.”
If they approve the buy-back, shareholders will be given preference in buying season tickets and will have their names in a walkway or on a roll of honour at any new stadium. Chelsea will guarantee that if they move before 2020 it will be to a ground within three miles of the Bridge with 10 per cent of seats made available to children and under-21s.
Please, dear Lord... Nooooo!!!
ReplyDeleteChelsea need a larger stadium to compete with the Mancs.
ReplyDeleteDunno - I'd gladly trade one of the ghastly planned highrises for a football stadium. Let Kensington & Chelsea have a new tower for once.
ReplyDeleteI don't quite understand why Chelsea FC would have to buy Stamford Bridge from its shareholders, though. Maybe they also they get to decided where the club plays, or the 199-year lease is prohibitively expensive to carry for any empty stadium.
Is this some new planning idea for Vauxhall roundabout?? :)
ReplyDelete