Major update on Chelsea’s potential stadium move has good and bad news | OneFootball

Just days after part-owner Todd Boehly mentioned Chelsea’s desire to increase their matchday income by improving Stamford Bridge or moving the club to a new home, there has been a massive update on the potential bid to build at the Earl’s Court site up the road.

Boehly admitted that if he and the Clearlake group had a full on disagreement about how to proceed over the stadium plans, they would go their separate ways. If all goes to plan though, that won’t be necessary.

The Guardian’s story today says that the Blues have to submit an official bid for the Earl’s Court site, or “risk missing out on the chance to move.”

Figures from Chelsea have held high level talks with people “who will have a say over the future” of said site, but no official bid is yet in. The piece is filled with warnings of how fraught it could be to build a stadium there – from the £500m cost of the land to the political obstacles.

“It is believed local politicians would be highly reluctant to back a football stadium over the Earl’s Court Development Company’s promise of new homes,” Jacob Steinberg writes.

There are positives in there too: “Chelsea’s intention not to buy the entire site is not an issue. It has been stressed that it would not be difficult for them to find a partner keen to build on a piece of prime real estate in west London.”

The club will have to get the approval of the Chelsea Pitch Owners before moving anywhere, and that means they will first approach the CPO before any serious offers are made.

Stamford Bridge stay still on the cards

The Sir Oswald Stoll mansions.

Staying at Stamford Bridge is still on the cards – as Steinberg notes, we bought the Stoll housing building next to the stadium to facilitate such a move. But we all know the drawbacks at this stage – a stand by stand redevelopment is slow and difficult, while knocking the whole thing down would mean us playing at another venue for several years.