Chelsea's plan To Be World Number One - 26/11/2006

Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon has outlined the club's plans to be No.1 club in the world by 2014. The remarks were made by Kenyon, formerly chief executive at Manchester United, in the context of this afternoon's clash between England's top two clubs at Old Trafford, but they were more than mind games but reflected a long-strategy the club has discussed before. The biggest obstacle the club faces is the 42,000 capacity of Stamford Bridge. Their aim is to have a ground holding 55,000, but access problems prevent that being achieved at the Bridge. The club have rejected vacant sites at Earls Court and Battersea Power Station as too small and turned down an option on the Olympic Stadium. Kenyon is searching for land in south-west London, emphasing that while the club wants a bigger stadium 'it's not going to be at the expense of moving to Brussels or Milton Keynes.' Actually, many clubs that have moved to new stadiums have not found the experience leads to better performance on the pitch: Arsenal, Derby, Leicester, Southampton and Sunderland come to mind, although it has worked out reasonably well for Middlesbrough and Wigan.

Kenyon gave it large to United in his remarks, although also took a swipe at his own club's past which may not please Chelsea fans. He described the club before Roman Abramovich took over as 'a fairly soulless place' which seems an odd description of the old days of The Shed. Making a comparison with United, he commented, 'Chelsea's success was sporadic and we did not have the depth of heritage to pull back on. We're probably expected to do things that bit different and that's part of the DNA of Chelsea. We're based in one of the top three cities in the world, which is another difference from Manchester. Chelsea as a football club and a brand is more dynamic, more relevant. Manchester United was built around heritage. Chelsea didn't have a tragedy, [is that really an advantage?] didn't have ten years of unbelievable success in the Sixties, which culminated in winning the European Cup and then the Fergie years.'

Chelsea's revenue has increased from £90.5m to £149.1m over three years and its domestic fan base of self-described supporters has quadrupled to almost four million. However, having topped the Deloitte Football Money League for eight of the past years, United is still ahead in terms of revenue (although Kenyon claims they are now on a par) and fan base. Although I am not one of those who resent the benefaction Chelsea have received as it has at least made the top of the Premiership more competitive than it was (albeit a duopoly rather than a monopoly), one might re-write the traditional Chelsea song as follows: 'Blue is the colour, money is the game, rip off all the punters, what a bleeding shame.'