20 Jul 2026 10:36:45
A mate told me this morning that The Happy Hammers have so far sold 50k season tickets. If I remember correctly, we will sell about 30k for a stadium capacity 42k ish.
While I am aware that options and planning permissions take time, these came in with strong promises but so far very little action. I made my position very clear early in that I can’t see these owners being in place when and if a stadium build takes place.
I have also said I don’t like the idea of “funds” as owners.
With the FAB, in my opinion, not fit for purpose, I think we will end up way behind other clubs with a stadium capacity of 60k let alone 42k with very few questions being asked and certainly no answers given.
I just cannot see these owners being around if we fail to qualify for the Champs League, but I also think they will sell asap, subject to the restrictive covenants.
20 Jul 2026 10:58:11
Tom
This was exactly my point on the SB project. You can add no permanent FOS either, yer, I was deemed to be negative.
My view was not for the likes of us, Tom, but for the younger generation going forward.
Unfortunately, we have the owners for another 6 years.
20 Jul 2026 11:15:30
Bill, we have all become frustrated with the lack of long term FOS sponsors, and my argument about the maths went out of the window at the start of last season, but I see that as a separate topic to SB development and the promises made by these owners. They promised stadium investment, fan involvement and open communication. In my opinion, they have failed in all three of those areas.
As far as not being able to sell, I'm sure that restrictive covenant can be got around if it becomes important for the club's survival, and that's how I would now frame it.
I have sent a string of emails this morning looking for answers and assurances. I doubt I will get acknowledgment of receipt, let alone a reply. My open email to all FAB members was, in my opinion, scathing. I have also sent copies to the CST and CPO.
20 Jul 2026 12:37:05
You have to give it another 3 years, Bill. It is way too early to judge the owners. You must have an agenda.
20 Jul 2026 13:14:28
The difference is I'm not stupid enough to call for new owners before giving our current owners a chance. I didn't want them in the beginning, but I had to accept they were the best of a bad bunch.
I'm also not going to call for new owners because they are in short supply, and any new owner may well be worse.
I do want these owners to treat the fans with some respect, and I do want them to communicate with their loyal supporters. If anyone can be bothered to read the mins of the last FAB meeting, they will understand my frustration.
20 Jul 2026 13:18:42
No agenda, Standard, I just want a decision to be made on the SB project, to be honest I have got to the stage where I don't care now if we stay as long as there is a published plan as to how we can move forward.
The FOS, I will keep on about, with the owners not getting a free ride. The money we are losing is criminal.
20 Jul 2026 13:48:27
Rebuilding Stamford Bridge is incredibly difficult due to a number of issues, including the stadium's tightly constrained site, which is heavily locked in by the Fulham Broadway Tube station, active District Line railway tracks, and dense residential properties. It is not simply a case of knocking down the existing stadium and complex and building a 70,000 or 80,000 seat stadium to help compete with rivals such as Man.Utd who are looking at 100,000 seats.
The most we could hope for would be around 58,000, and the cost involved to give around 17,000 more seats over current capacity is enormous, and would likely take around 5 to 7 years to complete, which throws up the next challenge of where to play in the meantime? There are options, but pleasing a fanbase is an entirely different matter.
Would fans want to travel to The London Stadium or Wembley or even The Tottenham Hotspur Stadium for 5 to 7 years?
The club's preferred option would be to relocate to another site within a very reasonable distance of Stamford Bridge, but few, if any, sites are available at present, and the board and ownership group want to fully exhaust possibility before committing to a Stamford Bridge re-build.
I hope this helps.
20 Jul 2026 14:08:23
Jason, All colour on the current lack of communication from our current owners can only help, and I thank you for your input, but that has now been the case since the current owners took over.
The FAB are, in my opinion, incompetent and didn't even have any SB rebuild or move on their last agenda.
Let me also make it very clear.
I am not asking for the owners to leave (unlike the CST) because I cannot see any alternatives.
What I do want is for them to do what they promised to the fans when they took over. If I remember correctly, they said they would improve the infrastructure of the club and continually communicate with its loyal fanbase.
20 Jul 2026 14:38:33
In case other posters do not know Jason is the president of CFC.
20 Jul 2026 15:09:37
Jason,
Thank you for your update.
I would say, though, that the owners have had four years and we are nowhere near knowing what they are going to do.
You correctly say there are not many places to move to, which should in my mind make the decision much easier.
Maybe you could also give us an insight as to why it's taking so long to obtain a long term front of shirt sponsor.
Is there a way the owners could sell up before the remaining 6 years are up?
20 Jul 2026 15:34:47
Maybe, some posters should reconsider their personal criticism of players, managers, SD's and owners. It would appear they do look at social media sites.
Let's be critical when it's due, but not personal, is my view.
20 Jul 2026 16:42:59
Not sure if I'm the only one, but I'm actually happy with no FOS sponsor. The kits are much nicer as well without it, really old school.
Also, regarding SB, I love it as it is. Just knock down the hotels, build a bigger Shed End, stick the away fans somewhere else, and just modernise the other stands, get it nearer to 50k capacity.
Personally, I'd hate to relocate, SB is our home and it should always remain that.
Easy for me to say though...
20 Jul 2026 17:15:20
I agree with you, SteveCfc, on both points. I love the shirt with no sponsor splashed all over it, and I would hate to leave Stamford Bridge. Just tidy it up, add another 9,000 seats, and we are good to go.
Some fans enjoy calling us plastic and rent boys, whilst also knocking our home, but do they know us, and have they even been to Stamford Bridge.
20 Jul 2026 17:39:40
RPD, I have always predicted that the current owners would decide a rebuild of the Shed and East Stand would end up being their decision.
I now think an increase to 50k-60k is just not enough, and will only result in the club revisiting the situation sooner rather than later, and any SB extension being almost redundant before it's completed.
We need a stadium with a minimum 70k capacity.
City are looking to expand their ground, and Utd are going to build a 100k capacity stadium.
The two choices are, as far as I am concerned: Redevelop SB but with significant extra capacity, or, more likely, a new site that doesn't restrict our potential and ambitions.
So, as far as I am concerned, the club should communicate to the fans asap that the sticking plaster solution is off the table.
20 Jul 2026 17:51:47
Yes, thank you Jason for your post. Very good to have information like this from someone in your position, even if it means that the stadium situation is very tricky to resolve.
Would just echo Bill's post and question, and ask if there is any information you could give on likely time frame in terms of decision making - eg re moving or redeveloping on existing site - or is this still not known?
20 Jul 2026 18:12:25
I agree, Tom, that the club should communicate with the fans.
But, in all honesty, do you see us filling a 70k stadium? Against top sides, yes we will, but lesser teams will be tourists in my opinion.
20 Jul 2026 18:28:42
Steve, I guess I could be criticised for putting the cart before the horse. In my opinion, we could easily fill a 70k stadium if we are successful and if we play attractive football.
The location of our current stadium lends itself to so called tourist fans.
If I remember correctly, this was the idea behind the 2/3rds season ticket allocation and 1/3 members. The deliberate plan was to spread the brand rather than making it a closed supporters group.
20 Jul 2026 22:10:06
Sorry Bill, I was only joking. I agree with you.
21 Jul 2026 07:58:27
No worries, Standard, I thought it was a tongue in cheek post, so no offence taken.
To be honest, I never take offence to any post back at me, as all posters should be able to have their own views. Most of the time, my views differ from other posters.
22 Jul 2026 15:24:32
Agree. Unfortunately, I feel like anyone who had an opinion that wasn't in full agreement with the current project was just seen as negative, so I got a bit bored of it.