Chelsea’s Record Losses and the PSR Mirage

The news filtering out of Stamford Bridge this week isn’t just eye-watering; for Evertonians, it’s a galling reminder of the Premier League’s grossly unfair financial restrictions as applied to "smaller" clubs.

Uefa data has confirmed that Chelsea FC posted a pre-tax loss of £355M for the 2024-25 season — the highest deficit ever recorded in the history of English football.

While the London club navigates these staggering numbers with a shrug and a "business as usual" outlook, those of us all too faniliar with previous gooings on at Goodison Park are left wondering: how is a £355M loss in a single year "sustainable," while Everton were docked a total of 10 points for successive breaches of the 3-year limit that were, by comparison, pocket change?

The Numbers: A Tale of Two Realities

Under the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR), clubs are permitted a maximum loss of £105M over a rolling three-year period. Let’s look at how the two clubs compare in their treatment by the authorities.

How Did Everton Fall Foul?

Everton’s downfall was a perfect storm of ambition meeting rigid bureaucracy. We admitted to exceeding the threshold, but argued that the unforeseeable impact of the Ukraine invasion (losing £20M+ in USM sponsorship) and the financing of a world-class stadium should be mitigating factors.

The Independent Commission disagreed. They ruled that the £105M limit was a "generous threshold" and that any breach was serious enough to warrant a sporting sanction. We were told that "prudent management" should have accounted for global geopolitical shifts. Apparently, the Premier League expects Everton to have a better intelligence network than MI6!

Why Chelsea Are "Safe" (For Now)

How can a club lose over a third of a billion pounds in 12 months and stay within the rules? The answer lies in the "creative accounting" that the Premier League continues to tolerate from its heavy hitters:

1. Asset Sales to Themselves: Chelsea famously sold two hotels and the women’s team to their own parent company, BlueCo, to generate "profit" on paper. While UEFA has begun to clamp down on these "related-party transactions," the Premier League’s current rules allowed them to count as legitimate income.

2. Amortisation Acrobatics: By putting players on unprecedented 8-year contracts, Chelsea spread the "cost" of their billion-pound spending spree thinly over nearly a decade, even while the cash flew out the door immediately.

3. The June "Fire Sale": Chelsea’s reported £300M in player sales (including academy products like Conor Gallagher and Mason Mount) provided "pure profit" that plugged the hole just enough to satisfy the domestic December 31st deadline.

The Double Standard

The core of the frustration for ToffeeWebbers isn't that Everton broke a rule; it’s that the rules are applied with a selective rigour that feels designed to protect the status quo.

When Everton overspent to build a legacy new stadium in a fantastic waterfront location for the city, we were hit with the "biggest sporting sanction in top-flight history." When Chelsea overspends on a scattergun recruitment policy that makes a mockery of the transfer market, they are given a pat on the back for their "business rationalisation."

If PSR was truly about "sustainability," a £355M loss would trigger an immediate red alert. Instead, it seems the Premier League is more concerned with the way you lose money than how much you actually lose. Sell a hotel to yourself? Fine. Build a stadium that transforms a derelict docklands? Minus ten points.

The Verdict

As we look at a Premier League table where points are won on the pitch but lost in front of so-called Independent Commissions, the Chelsea news confirms what we’ve long suspected: PSR is a blunt instrument used to keep the "aspiring" clubs in their place, while the elite are free to fully exploit their wealth.

Everton were the guinea pigs for a system that is clearly not fit for purpose. Unless the Premier League holds Chelsea to the same "rigorous standard" they applied to us, the integrity of the competition remains a hollow joke.

Yes, PSR is being phased out, with Squad Cost Ratio (SCR) taking their place. But the net effect will likely be the same in terms of protection for the Premier League's protected elite.