The Premier League have cleared Chelsea‘s £76.5 million ($101m) sale of two hotels to a sister company in a deal which aids their compliance with the division’s profit and sustainability rules (PSR), sources have told ESPN.
In the club’s accounts for the 2022-23 financial year published in April, it was revealed that the west London club made a loss of £89.9m, but that figure would have been £166.4m had they not sold the Millennium and Copthorne hotels adjacent to Stamford Bridge.
Editor’s Picks
1 Related
The deal meant the two properties changed ownership from Chelsea FC Holdings Ltd to BlueCo 22 Properties Ltd. Both companies are subsidiaries of Chelsea’s holding company, BlueCo 22 Ltd.
While UEFA and the English Football League bans such sales, the Premier League allows them to take place subject to an assessment of their “fair market value” under the league’s associated-party transaction rules.
ESPN can reveal that according to sources, this process has now been completed and the deals were found to be within an acceptable margin relating to estimates of the hotels’ valuation had they been sold to another bidder.
Reports suggested some of Chelsea’s Premier League rivals were sceptical about the validity of the sales and any complications could have led to renewed questions over the club’s dealings as well as their ability to comply with PSR rules.
Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital took over at Chelsea in May 2022. Catherine Ivill – AMA/Getty Images
Under PSR, clubs are permitted to have a maximum of £105m in losses over a three-year period. Certain costs including infrastructure spending and investment in women’s football can be deducted.
A source close to Clearlake Capital, the majority owner of Chelsea, told ESPN the club are confident of complying with the rules both in previous seasons and in the 2024-25 accounting period.
The Premier League voted on whether to ban the type of transactions to sister companies at their Annual General Meeting in June, but sources have told ESPN that only 11 clubs supported the proposal. A minimum of 14 votes was needed for the rule to change.
