Richard Masters speaks out as Newcastle United learn truth about £200m Chelsea ‘loophole..
Newcastle United were sold for just £105m more than what Chelsea’s women’s side went for but Premier League chief executive Richard Masters has stressed what the Blues did was ‘permissible’
Premier League chief executive Richard Masters
Richard Masters has insisted that Chelsea have not ‘exploited a loophole’ by selling their women’s team to a sister company for £200m.
BlueCo’s move helped Chelsea comply with PSR rules and record a pre-tax profit of £128.4m in 2023-24. For context, the sale price was ‘only’ £105m less than what Newcastle United, as a club, were sold for back in 2021.
Article continues below
Masters has now addressed the matter for the first time after the Premier League’s chief executive was quizzed by Sarah Keig, a Fulham fan representative, at a Football Supporters’ Association event.
Article continues below
“SK raised concerns about Chelsea Football Club selling their women’s team for a reported £200m to pass profit and sustainability rules, thereby exploiting a loophole,” the minutes of the meeting read.
READ MORE:Newcastle United get green light to complete transfer Eddie Howe has been waiting for
READ MORE:Gareth Bale input makes mockery of Man City’s paltry Tino Livramento valuation
“RM said the club hadn’t exploited a loophole as what Chelsea did was permissible and he stressed that all transactions are subject to a fair market value assessment.
The deal, as Masters rightly pointed out, remains subject to top-flight approval – just as the sale of two club-owned hotels previously did before the value of the transaction was reduced.
Article continues below
Keep your finger on the pulse of the Toon with Lee Ryder, plus selected offers and competitions
Enter your Email…
Subscribe
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. More info
Chelsea have even confirmed that the agreement contains a clause requiring an ‘adjustment to the consideration receivable in the event that the Premier League’s determination of the fair market value differs from the £200m recognised’.
Although Chelsea’s most recent accounts revealed the women’s team brought in revenues of little more than £11.5m in 2023-24, a 10% stake has since been bought by Alexis Ohanian for £20m, which reflects the immense potential of the game.
The Reddit founder, who was previously the largest shareholder in Angel City FC until the NWSL side were sold for £192.3m last year, has boldly declared that ‘this will be a billion-dollar franchise one day’.
Newcastle operate a different model – the women’s side was brought into the heart of the club following the takeover rather than being split into a separate entity – but the deal could have a knock-on effect on the Magpies’ overall valuation as former Manchester City financial advisor Stefan Borson previously explained.
“If Chelsea’s women’s team is worth £200m, all of the value in the women’s team that justifies £200m is about what the women’s game looks like in 2050,” he said. “It’s not about what it looks like in 2025.
“It’s irrelevant in the formative years of the women’s game that Chelsea won trophies because it’s all about the future value. So if it’s all about the future value of a top football club franchise in the women’s game, that applies to almost any Premier League club regardless of their current size.”Newcastle, Everton and Aston Villa’s women teams are all worth over £100m on the Chelsea valuation metrics because it’s not about what they have won so far or the revenue or the profit – it’s about what they might be worth in 25 years’ time with a football brand the equivalent of Chelsea’s.”
Chelsea, and their rivals, will still be able to sell assets to related companies and include the revenue in their PSR calculations for this coming season after top-flight sides did not hold a vote on changing the rules at a shareholders’ meeting earlier this month.
Leave a Reply