Newcastle United's English head coach Eddie Howe reacts on the touchline
You have to take your hat off to them. Chelsea certainly know how to get creative when it comes to their profit and sustainability responsibilities.
Not content with pulling off an 11th hour reprieve in the 2022/23 financial year, when the Blues sold two hotels to a sister company for a combined £76.5m, this time around they have gone bigger and better to dodge Premier League sanctions. Monday brought the news Chelsea have actually turned a whopping £128.4m profit for the 2023/24 financial period - up from the £90.1m pre-tax loss in the first year of Todd Boehly's Clearlake Capital ownership - largely down to the fact they sold their women’s team to the club’s parent company.
It must be noted that a sale of this kind is legal under the Premier League’s current spending regulations. However, it remains to be seen whether UEFA will allow such a manoeuvre.
All this, while Newcastle United - and a host of their top flight rivals - scrimp and save, sell much-loved and talented academy players and go window after window without signing a first-team addition. It is another reminder the current rules are not fit for purpose.
It is worth remembering, also, Eddie Howe has not signed a player who currently occupies a space in his starting XI since the summer of 2023. Chelsea, just last month, signed Sporting midfielders Geovany Quenda, 17, and Dario Essugo, 20, for a combined fee of £62.4m.
Newcastle often get, mistakenly, tarred with being the 'richest club in the world' but the truth is they have had to work hard to ensure they stay inside the lines when it comes to the stringent PSR measures. Additional sponsorship agreements have been sought, at fair market value, increased matchday income has arrived due to more corporate offerings inside St James' Park and unfortunate player exits have been sanctioned, subsequently weakening Howe's hand.
The Newcastle boss himself has bemoaned the rules of late after being forced to offload these players against his will. There was no great desire to lose Lloyd Kelly in January, while the 2024 summer exit of Elliot Anderson still stings to this day.
"I felt really uncomfortable in the summer when we were forced to make sales of two really talented young players in Elliot Anderson and Yankuba Minteh, against our will really for financial reasons," Howe told reporters in December.
"One was an academy product [Anderson] we'd invested in since he joined the club as a young lad. You just think, 'why are we doing this? This doesn't feel right.'
"I understand the rules to a degree. I understand the concept but I think how it is fundamentally working at the moment is not right."
Howe is not alone in questioning the current rules - and Chelsea's latest loophole again calls into question how such financial moves can be allowed at present. After all, how 'sustainable' can the west London outfit really be if they are constantly having to sell huge chunks of their property to stay afloat?
The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust have already written to the Premier League chief executive, Richard Masters, calling for an investigation into the connections of Boehly and the ticket exchange and resale company - Vivid Seats - in recent days. There is clearly discontent growing with the Stamford Bridge ownership, despite - on the face of it - and large amount of profit being made in the latest accounts.
For now, nothing will change. Chelsea will escape any sanctions, domestically, for their latest balance sheet. However, you can't help but feel clubs such as Newcastle will feel aggrieved at the latest loophole exploitation at the opposite end of the country.