Chelsea’s transfer policy in the new regime has been to sign the best young talent from around the world, with a clear intent to compete at the highest levels both domestically and in Europe.

In the two years since the takeover, the Blues have essentially rewritten the rules of engagement in the transfer market after spending over £1billion to bring in the likes of Moises Caicedo, Enzo Fernandez, Mykhailo Mudryk, Wesley Fofana, and Marc Cucurella each for fees worth over £60 million. 

This spending power has provided a brand-new first-team squad and sent a clear message to Chelsea’s rivals.

Despite the huge outlay on establishing the foundations of their ambitious project, Chelsea’s owners have mostly signed their players on long-term contracts of up to eight years. These overvalued transfer fees have been amortised throughout their contract, so Chelsea gets to spread the cost of signing those players during that time. 

This bold transfer strategy exposed a loophole in the Premier League’s Financial Fair Play regulations and topflight clubs have quickly voted to cap amortisation at five years.

Chelsea tickets will sell fast ahead of the 2024/25 season as fans and neutrals look to see what the club will look like under the guidance of Enzo Maresca.

Chelsea’s smart FFP strategy explained

Financial fair pay is governed by profitability rather than cash flow, so as long as a club breaks even from a profit perspective (or falls within the allowable deficit), it is deemed to be compliant. 

This is because the expense included in the profit and loss statement as regards a transfer is the amortisation cost. This is derived from the total transfer fee divided by the length of the contract, with this expense then incurred on the profit and loss statement each year throughout the contract. 

For instance, if a standard four-year contract had been offered to Enzo Fernandez, then the yearly P&L impact on Chelsea’s record would have been £105m divided by 4 years, equalling £26.25m. Instead, the eight-year contract the Argentine signed will reflect as £13.125m (£105m/8 years) on the books.

Risks of the strategy

Perhaps the biggest risk to Chelsea’s strategy is the long-term commitment being made to several promising but largely unproven players. Of any of them who will inevitably fail to make the grade, the club will be saddled with having to pay the wages of liability for the best part of this decade with little chance of selling a player who has no incentive to leave. 

On the other hand, handing eight-year contracts to new signings casts doubt on the future of the young players in their academy system who then become profit-generating assets for the club.

Thankfully for the Stamford Bridge outfit, many of their most expensive stars have already been signed to these eight-year contracts which will still be in effect, but the change of rules means they benefited from this loophole and voted in favour of slamming it shut. 

The Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules permit clubs to make a loss of £105m over three years, and Chelsea’s ability to continue to fund these moves hinges on the sale of several homegrown players. The likes of Ian Maatsen, Lewis Hall, Armando Broja, Conor Gallagher and Trevoh Chalobah could potentially generate around £150 million in pure profit this summer which would bolster Chelsea’s transfer budget and ensure compliance with financial regulations.

More players including Kepa Arrizabalaga and Romelu Lukaku are among those expected to depart Stamford Bridge while Everton and West Ham are interested in signing David Datro Fofana.

Chelsea’s broader approach is to refresh the squad with high-potential talent while maintaining financial sustainability in a multi-club model that allows them to manage the turnover of players. This is a bold vision that needs clear direction as they secure players to impact the present or be long-term assets.

An incentivised wage structure is also thought to help the owners keep a lid on paying exorbitant salaries to young players on long contracts. These transfer ambitions are extravagant, to say the least but it has captured the imagination as the football world collectively waits to see how it pans out in the long run. 

How has Chelsea fared this summer?

This transfer window has not seen a shortage of action as Chelsea have been busy signing the likes of Tosin Adarabioyo, Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall, Marc Guiu and Omari Kellyman while a deal has been put in place for Estevao Willian to join in June 2025. 

Chelsea had the second youngest squad in the top-flight behind relegated Burnley and after 39-year-old Thiago Silva departed they will be the youngest next term unless they add some vital experience. 

Although Aaron Anselmino, Renato Veiga and Caleb Wiley are on the verge of signing for Chelsea, they have looked to recruit players with experience as seen with the 26-year-old Adarabioyo and 25-year-old Dewsbury-Hall.

Plans are in place to further strengthen the squad with links to Nico Williams, Viktor Gyokeres, Alexander Isak, Victor Osimhen, Karim Adeyemi, Johan Bakayoko, Samu Omorodion and Jonathan David as possible attacking additions. 

Michael Olise initially appeared to be top of their list of attacking targets before he chose to sign for Bayern Munich, while links to Dani Olmo have recently emerged. With two senior strikers likely to be sold, Enzo Maresca is reportedly assessing Nicolas Jackson, Christopher Nkunku and Marc Guiu in the preseason before deciding on strengthening that position.

All in all, the audacious attempt of the Chelsea owners to spend on extensively scouted talents while ensuring compliance with FFP is a risky plan. 

Possible financial limitations in the long term are solely dependent on how soon their expensive investments pay off.