Roman Abramovich hands over ‘stewardship and care’ of Chelsea football club

[Sassy Colombian]

Chelsea fans chanting Abramovich's name during the minute of silence for Ukraine just reinforces the stereotype of a lot of football fans being far right.

Appalling, I would be embarrassed to be a Chelsea fan. No only did they chant his name, but they actually disrupted a moment of solidarity in support of Ukraine to cheer on Abramovich. So disgusting.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Chelsea fans chanting Abramovich's name during the minute of silence for Ukraine just reinforces the stereotype of a lot of football fans being far right.

They don't help themselves a lot do Chelsea fans. On one hand I can see why they want to show their support to Abramovich, who probably is as much a victim caught up in all of this, but they chose the worst possible time to give it.

 

[Walham Green Blue]

They don't help themselves a lot do Chelsea fans. On one hand I can see why they want to show their support to Abramovich, who probably is as much a victim caught up in all of this, but they chose the worst possible time to give it.

Yes I mentioned this yesterday. We have a large number of absolute t1ts who can’t help themselves. I don’t actually have a problem with them chanting their appreciation of him, for what he’s done for the club, just not then. Appallingly crass from a bunch of f***wits. Stupidity personified en masse.

 

[catcherintherye]

Going to 400% GDP gross when you you have such a low mark to begin with isn't impressive mate, Angola was about the same, when they started oil and gas production, again they started from such a low bar of no production whatsoever thanks to decades long civil war, Norway in the 70's probably had the same jump when they started oil and gas production.

Again, Soviet Union collapsed for a reason lol, it was 3rd world, they were practically as scholars says say "painting rust for decades" to make the West think they were financially strong.

Their oil and gas refineries were practically none existent, they took loans from the World Bank, IMF, hell even America gave them aid in the mid 90's, and Russia got help from European and America oil companies to rebuild their refineries, so when oil and gas started pumping out their growth is going to jump up when they you go from barely any barrels of oil a day to 13 million barrels a day by the early 00's, then the the war on terror really was a good time for energy rich countries when Oil was selling from before the war at an average of $30 dollars a barrel to $120-$180 up and down for 8 years in the 00's. Gazprom Yukoil Sibneft, Abramovich, Usmanov and Khordovsky who were the heads of those companies in the early 00's saw a massive jump in their wealth in that time frame.

But their growth has slowed down considerably the last decade, to reliant on oil and gas revenues while not building any other industries like a functioning country does, while the rest of the west has gradually gone up, Russia has stagnated because it's a commodity dependent economy, they hit a everest peak and couldn't maintain it when energy prices lowered and they flatlined, countries in the west saw GDP continually grow in the same time frame, since 2010 Usa went from a 14 trillion GDP to 20 trillion today, China from 6 trillion to 14 trillion today, Germany Australia Canada India UK and and japan have seen the same growth in the same time frame.

Russian GDP in 2010 was 1.5 trillion, last year their GDP was 1.4 trillion and Oligarchs own 70% of the GDP and that is why Russia has a 10k GDP per capita, you say capitalists in the west stole riches, at least the money trickles down promotes growth, Education and vibrant new industries and why the western world countries averages 40k to 60K gdp per capita, that doesn't happen in Russia, who and what is stopping the growth, where is the money going for the younger generations who'll eventaully take on the mantel of the country, why have they not been building a vibrant expanding economy that isn't commodity based mate?

You seem to be moving the goalposts rather than answering the question that was set. Which was- was GDP growth that bad under Putin?

You can find other examples of country's, over a 20 year period who have grown 400%+. I don't doubt that. But I doubt anybody is saying Angola's GDP growth is bad, or Norway in the 70's was bad. That's the difference. In an abstract sense of course any leader, at any time could do better. But a growth that is around 5 x what the US did, and over 7 x what the UK did in the same period, cannot by any reasonable measure be considered anything other than good performance.

Yes to some degree Russia was underperforming, but Putin took it from underperforming and got it to perform to a level that previous leaders couldn't. Whether we like the guy or not, this was perhaps the best, if not only success he has had.

Had he have adopted what I suspect is your perspective, and allowed American's to dominate the agenda further, I suspect you would have seen a repeat of what's happened in many countries whereby America and it's nearest allies steal the resources of that country (and I don't mean the alleged Theft of your Usmanov's, I mean actual theft and pillaging of resources) that has gone in on places like Iraq. Russia's ordinary people would not have benefited from that, as the ordinary people who live in countries in Central/South America who went along with have not benefited at all. They've not seen living standards raised by 400%+ thats for sure!

I also think your target of 50k is wholly unrealistic. It's completely unrealistic for a country with the structural problems Russia has. That would represent a level of growth that would around 40x the level that has happened in America in the same period. It's completely infeasible. I can't think of many countries, who over a 20 year period would have had a 25 x in performance. I'm sure it's happened somewhere, but it's very much the exception not the norm.

So to go back to point. You cannot, in any decent faith look at the overarching GDP numbers and not say that Putin has been overwhelmingly successful in terms of GDP growth when compared to their western rivals. Any other conclusion than that is complete stupidity.

 

[SantaClausisanEvertonian]

I wouldn't expect anything else from the Chelsea fans, who are essentially a bunch of racist tories and wannabe hooligans.
Horrible club.

 

[EverTheOptimist]

You seem to be moving the goalposts rather than answering the question that was set. Which was- was GDP growth that bad under Putin?

You can find other examples of country's, over a 20 year period who have grown 400%+. I don't doubt that. But I doubt anybody is saying Angola's GDP growth is bad, or Norway in the 70's was bad. That's the difference. In an abstract sense of course any leader, at any time could do better. But a growth that is around 5 x what the US did, and over 7 x what the UK did in the same period, cannot by any reasonable measure be considered anything other than good performance.

Yes to some degree Russia was underperforming, but Putin took it from underperforming and got it to perform to a level that previous leaders couldn't. Whether we like the guy or not, this was perhaps the best, if not only success he has had.

Had he have adopted what I suspect is your perspective, and allowed American's to dominate the agenda further, I suspect you would have seen a repeat of what's happened in many countries whereby America and it's nearest allies steal the resources of that country (and I don't mean the alleged Theft of your Usmanov's, I mean actual theft and pillaging of resources) that has gone in on places like Iraq. Russia's ordinary people would not have benefited from that, as the ordinary people who live in countries in Central/South America who went along with have not benefited at all. They've not seen living standards raised by 400%+ thats for sure!

I also think your target of 50k is wholly unrealistic. It's completely unrealistic for a country with the structural problems Russia has. That would represent a level of growth that would around 40x the level that has happened in America in the same period. It's completely infeasible. I can't think of many countries, who over a 20 year period would have had a 25 x in performance. I'm sure it's happened somewhere, but it's very much the exception not the norm.

So to go back to point. You cannot, in any decent faith look at the overarching GDP numbers and not say that Putin has been overwhelmingly successful in terms of GDP growth when compared to their western rivals. Any other conclusion than that is complete stupidity.

He got it performing because stubborn Russia finally allowed western help to build their energy infrastructure, which in turn saw growth of the 400% you keep repeating FFS, Russia was in such a financial mess it had to take loans from the IMF and World Bank with contingencies of opening up Russia to the west, which in the end didn't work out to great as the Oligarchs had a firm grip on all the industries and why it underperforms so bad GDP wise when the likes of Usmanov, Abramovich, Berezovsky, Khordorkovsky etc etc hoarded stole and kept Russian people's wealth amongst themselves. So it should be the west who were the big factor in getting Russia to 400% growth, they rejuvenated their oil and gas refinaries and Europe Japan China bought their oil and gas in bulk.

Like I said and this should have been mentioned by you in reply at how ridiculous this stat is, 2010 after all that growth and at the end of those war on terror oil prices of $120-$180 a barrel of oil, Russian GDP was 1.4 trillion, in 2019 before the Pandemic their GDP was 1.5 trillion, an increase of a measly 100 billion 10 years later. You keep making out that Putin is some economic genius hahaha but that decade of high energy prices the GDP stayed the same and saw hardly any growth.?

In that same time frame USA increased theirs by 6 trillion, China their neighbour and closest ally increased their GDP by 8 trillion, China the world's premier Communist country that embraced open capitalism and not crony Kleptocracy oligarchism that you dearly admire is an economic superpower.

You need to read three books on Russian oilgarchy, Usmanov who you admire so dearly is mentioned in them, they are fascinating and essential reading on how Russia was systematically robbed by your hero oligarchy.

The Oligarchs : wealth and power by David E Hoffman.

Once upon a time in Russia by Ben Mezrich.

Sale of the century by Christia Freeland.

I never mentioned what I read about Usmanov here while he was at the club, he seemed to have quite a following from Evertonians who just thought he was a cuddly billionaire benefactor, but reading those three books and Ambassdor to Uzbekistan Craig Murray said and wrote about him, I kept quiet.

 

[EverTheOptimist]

What was his conviction?

And his crime seems to be to be associated with a country that's an enemy of American imperialism. Many would say that was a badge of honour.

Craig Murray mentions his conviction, he was ambassador at the time, Usmanov later got his website closed down in the UK courts, Boris Johnson was a blogger at the time there, his line was when he wrote about in his newspaper column, " This is the UK where we have freedom of press and free speech, this is not Uzbekistan, outrageous!!!".

His past was what made Arsenal's biggest shareholders from not selling him more shares and why he was stuck on 30% for years.

Usmanov claimed Gorbachev gave him a pardon when he gave a interview around the early days of him buying Arsenal shares, his jail sentence ended was when Yeltsin was leader years after Gorbachev had left office lol.

The Uzbek supreme court expunged his criminal record lol, around the time Usmanov was a billionaire, I guess he waited until he was super rich to have influence over the highest court of Uzbekistan lol.

 

[Prevenger17]

Fair play to @catcherintherye for getting a Liverpool fan disguised as a Ugandan Indian Everton fan to waste hours of his life posting clueless wham on an Everton forum. It's incredible to watch

 

[catcherintherye]

Craig Murray mentions his conviction, he was ambassador at the time, Usmanov later got his website closed down in the UK courts, Boris Johnson was a blogger at the time there, his line was when he wrote about in his newspaper column, " This is the UK where we have freedom of press and free speech, this is not Uzbekistan, outrageous!!!".

Usmanov claimed Gorbachev gave him a pardon when he gave a interview around the early days of him buying Arsenal shares, his jail sentence was when Yeltsin was leader years after Gorbachev had left office lol.

The Uzbek supreme court expunged his criminal record lol, around the time Usmanov was a billionaire, I guess he waited until he was super rich to have influence over the highest court of Uzbekistan lol.

Ok so have you got a link to this blog, written by a spook for the British ruling class? Any actual evidence?

What you are saying is, there may have bee a conviction, which was then pardoned and he was cleared of any wrongdoing? And that Murray may have written something, which on request of legal opinion was asked to be removed because it was inaccurate?

We can all write lots of things mate. If they are not accurate, they are irrelevant.

So, can you find me anything, where there has been an actual conviction, in an impartial legal court, for theft for Alisha Usnamov? Or even a conviction that hasn't been overturned/pardoned? Don't worry about what bloggers say, or Boris Johnson (I mean if he wrote there it was obviously a credible news outlet lol).

 

[Simon Buttle]

Craig Murray mentions his conviction, he was ambassador at the time, Usmanov later got his website closed down in the UK courts, Boris Johnson was a blogger at the time there, his line was when he wrote about in his newspaper column, " This is the UK where we have freedom of press and free speech, this is not Uzbekistan, outrageous!!!".

His past was what made Arsenal's biggest shareholders from not selling him more shares and why he was stuck on 30% for years.

Usmanov claimed Gorbachev gave him a pardon when he gave a interview around the early days of him buying Arsenal shares, his jail sentence ended was when Yeltsin was leader years after Gorbachev had left office lol.

The Uzbek supreme court expunged his criminal record lol, around the time Usmanov was a billionaire, I guess he waited until he was super rich to have influence over the highest court of Uzbekistan lol.

Usmanov was said to have served 6 years for racketeering (fraud) and it was said to be at the request of drug smuggler Gafur Rakhimov that his conviction was overturned.

 

[catcherintherye]

Fair play to @catcherintherye for getting a Liverpool fan disguised as a Ugandan Indian Everton fan to waste hours of his life posting clueless wham on an Everton forum. It's incredible to watch

The thing is, it's not even coherent wham.

A blogger who was mates with Boris Johnson said something, so it must be true. I mean honestly.

 

[catcherintherye]

Usmanov was said to have served 6 years for racketeering (fraud) and it was said to be at the request of drug smuggler Gafur Rakhimov that his conviction was overturned.

"Said to have". Can you tell me what he was in jail for, and if the crime has not been formally pardoned (i.e legally overturned). I'm interested in dealing with actuals, not conspiracies here,

 

[Simon Buttle]

"Said to have". Can you tell me what he was in jail for, and if the crime has not been formally pardoned (i.e legally overturned). I'm interested in dealing with actuals, not conspiracies here,

I said in my post what it was for, racketeering and yes it was pardoned and I said why, I don't know of any others and certainly not about theft, that's the first I have heard of that. The reason I was saying "said to have" was it's only stuff I have read in books and online before so, I somewhat agree with you as you can never be sure with stuff coming out from that part of the world as it's so corrupt.

 

[catcherintherye]

He got it performing because stubborn Russia finally allowed western help to build their energy infrastructure, which in turn saw growth of the 400% you keep repeating FFS, Russia was in such a financial mess it had to take loans from the IMF and World Bank with contingencies of opening up Russia to the west, which in the end didn't work out to great as the Oligarchs had a firm grip on all the industries and why it underperforms so bad GDP wise when the likes of Usmanov, Abramovich, Berezovsky, Khordorkovsky etc etc hoarded stole and kept Russian people's wealth amongst themselves. So it should be the west who were the big factor in getting Russia to 400% growth, they rejuvenated their oil and gas refinaries and Europe Japan China bought their oil and gas in bulk.

Like I said and this should have been mentioned by you in reply at how ridiculous this stat is, 2010 after all that growth and at the end of those war on terror oil prices of $120-$180 a barrel of oil, Russian GDP was 1.4 trillion, in 2019 before the Pandemic their GDP was 1.5 trillion, an increase of a measly 100 billion 10 years later. You keep making out that Putin is some economic genius hahaha but that decade of high energy prices the GDP stayed the same and saw hardly any growth.?

In that same time frame USA increased theirs by 6 trillion, China their neighbour and closest ally increased their GDP by 8 trillion, China the world's premier Communist country that embraced open capitalism and not crony Kleptocracy oligarchism that you dearly admire is an economic superpower.

You need to read three books on Russian oilgarchy, Usmanov who you admire so dearly is mentioned in them, they are fascinating and essential reading on how Russia was systematically robbed by your hero oligarchy.

The Oligarchs : wealth and power by David E Hoffman.

Once upon a time in Russia by Ben Mezrich.

Sale of the century by Christia Freeland.

I never mentioned what I read about Usmanov here while he was at the club, he seemed to have quite a following from Evertonians who just thought he was a cuddly billionaire benefactor, but reading those three books and Ambassdor to Uzbekistan Craig Murray said and wrote about him, I kept quiet.

I mean to try and deal with some fundamentals here;
1) I don't admire Usmanov. I hardly know Usmanov, beyond him being a minority shareholder in a business that sponsors Everton. This is a slur that is being used, and is completely out of lie. You can't support it, and you should retract. I do not admire him, but I always make every effort to judge any individual, who I admire or not in an impartial and even handed manner. That means using evidence over opinion.

2) I'm not making Putin out to be "an economic genius". This is another unnecessary slur that should be retracted. I have pointed out to you, that you cannot in any good faith use GDP as a stick to beat him with, when he increased GDP per head by over 400%. I keep mentioning it, because it's the subject of the discussion. I don't think he's an economic genius, but he has been at the helm during a period of substantial upward trajectory for Russian people.

So if you have the integrity I believe you have, you should retract those attempted slurs.

As for the rest. The idea the West is responsible for Russia's turnaround, seemingly on the basis of being a trading partner has some merit. Personally I think the fact Putin kept the west from stealing their resources is a far bigger factor. The West has no interest in helping ordinary Russians, in the same way it had no interest in helping ordinary Vietnamese, Iraqis, Syrians, Palestinians, Lebanese, Haitians, Cubans, Iranians, Indians, Pakistani's, Afani's etc. It's aim is to extort wealth.

It is a great shame to me that Russia has the same system America does, whereby wealth is horded by the wealthiest. It's no accident, they followed the doctrine of Milton Freidman and the Austrian school of economics. It doesn't work. The most powerful can use their liquidity to push the poorest further into poverty. Wealth (as you inaccurately stated) does not trickle down. It flows upwards if left untapped. Only with government intervention and planning can that process be adapted. Where countries try to do this- Venezuala, Bolivia, China, Cuba etc they are met with brutal resistance from the American state.

If you want to understand the situation in Russia, we have to move away from this, frankly quite childish, viewpoint of bad individuals. It is an ideological system, designed by Americans and imprinted by force via 21st century colonialism by the Americans. It was their banks, their hedge funds, their mutual funds, their traders etc who also became enriched off the back of the mass sell off of former Society assets. The same happened in East Germany, where a few got rich while the rest got screwed.

As I stated to you previously, if you want to seriously challenge what is happening, you need to take the time to understand what the origins of it are based in, and which country is pushing it. "Follow the money" and all that, it leads to Wall Street.

As for the 3 books you have recommended, from what I can see they are from 3 North American authors who exist very much within that tradition of pro-capitalist, right of centre, shills of a broken system. Can I ask what you think anyone can really learn from such people?

I would recommend you read Naomi Klein's book I have mentioned and any array of Marx to understand capitalism and Lenin to understand imperialism. You will then see that what happened in Russia is not an aberration but a mere continuation of a flawed economic policy that blights ordinary people.

 

[catcherintherye]

I said in my post what it was for, racketeering and yes it was pardoned and I said why, I don't know of any others and certainly not about theft, that's the first I have heard of that. The reason I was saying "said to have" was it's only stuff I have read in books and online before so, I somewhat agree with you as you can never be sure with stuff coming out from that part of the world as it's so corrupt.

Ok. So do you have proof that what you have said is true? Like has it been established in the court of the land for example?

All we have currently is he has a conviction, not for theft, which was wrongfully given and subsequently overturned.