Raphael Stevens

Roman Abramovich issued a 110-word statement on Saturday following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which did not mention either country, announcing he would be stepping away from control of Chelsea but would remain owner.
The six trustees want more information about whether running the club would be compatible with UK charity law and raised their concerns at a meeting on Sunday.
Abramovich has invested over £1billion into the Stamford Bridge club since purchasing it in 2003 and will not be asking the club to repay the loans it owes him.

Chelsea’s Russian owner Roman Abramovich applauds as players celebrate their league title win at the end of the Premier League football match between Chelsea and Sunderland at Stamford Bridge in London on May 21, 2017.
Ben Stansall | Afp | Getty Images

The Chelsea Foundation has reported a “serious incident” to the Charity Commission before its trustees agree to take over “custody and care” of the club as requested by owner Roman Abramovich.
Russian billionaire Abramovich issued a 110-word statement on Saturday following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which did not mention either country, announcing he would be stepping away from control of Chelsea but would remain owner.

However, the six trustees want more information about whether running the club would be compatible with UK charity law and raised their concerns at a meeting on Sunday.
The foundation’s lawyers are now working to see whether what Abramovich is proposing can actually be put into effect.
The trustees would need to be totally comfortable from a legal point of view before they assume “control” of the club while Abramovich remains owner.
A statement issued by the Charity Commission on Monday said: “We have contacted the charity, seeking information and, in line with our guidance, the charity has also made a report to the commission. We cannot comment further at this time.”
A “serious incident” is defined by the Charity Commission as anything that represents harm to the charity’s beneficiaries, staff, volunteers or others who come into contact with the charity through its work, loss of the charity’s money or assets, damage to the charity’s property, or harm to the charity’s work or reputation.

Abramovich’s statement on Saturday was heavily criticised before Chelsea then released a second, shorter statement 14 hours later on Sunday morning, saying: “The situation in Ukraine is horrific and devastating. Chelsea FC’s thoughts are with everyone in Ukraine. Everyone at the club is praying for peace.”
Sky Sports pundits Jamie Carragher and Gary Neville both criticised the statements from Abramovich and Chelsea, questioning whether Abramovich’s handing over of stewardship and care falls short of handing over ownership.

Read more stories from Sky Sports

“They should have been a lot stronger in what they said, and regarding Roman Abramovich passing on to Chelsea trustees, that’s not him relinquishing the club, stewardship is not ownership,” said Carragher.
“It’s completely different because he’s still in charge, he’s still running it, which is fine. But to not actually mention in his initial statement what was going on in Ukraine, I thought was really poor.”
Neville described Abramovich’s statement as “meaningless”, saying: “It doesn’t have any strength behind it and the only question we want Roman Abramovich to answer, if he is going to speak, is ‘does he condemn the war or does he support the war on Ukraine?’
“I was surprised at Roman Abramovich, one of things he’s done well over that 20 years or so is not say anything. At the time when he has said something I think it’s left more questions than answers.”
Neville added: “I would have preferred Roman Abramovich to come out and say ‘I’m a Russian national, I own Chelsea Football Club and I will continue to own Chelsea Football club’.
“Chelsea charity trustees are not running the football club – executives and directors will [be] under the guidance of Roman Abramovich. So I don’t know why he thought, or those close to him thought it was going to wash. What he has done is try to use the charity as a shield, which I don’t think is impressive as a leader.”

Chelsea not for sale – but who will run the club?

Abramovich has invested over £1billion into the Stamford Bridge club since purchasing it in 2003 and will not be asking the club to repay the loans it owes him – meaning the long-term future of the club remains secure.
It is also understood that Abramovich remains adamant that Chelsea is not for sale.
But there are now questions about his long-term future at the club.
Whether Abramovich will ever return to taking a more visible hands-on role at the club will likely depend strongly on whether he faces any sanctions, and what happens in Ukraine and the UK’s relationship with Russia.
“A lot of Chelsea fans will want to know if he’s still going to be putting money in,” chief reporter Kaveh Solhekol told Sky Sports News. “I believe he will continue to back the club, but that of course could change if the UK Government announce he is being sanctioned – but they haven’t done that so far.”
There have been calls from MPs this week that Russian-born Abramovich should not be allowed to own Chelsea due to his alleged links to Vladimir Putin’s regime.
After Russian troops crossed the border into Ukraine on Thursday, Labour MP Chris Bryant told the House of Commons that the Russian-Israeli billionaire should have his assets seized, questioned whether he should be allowed to operate a football club himself, and quoted a leaked government document suggesting he should not be allowed to be based in the UK.
It is understood Abramovich will no longer be involved in club matters on a day-to-day basis and all long-term strategic decision-making powers are being handed over to the Chelsea Foundation.
The Chelsea Foundation’s trustees are Bruce Buck, John Devine, Emma Hayes, Piara Powar, and Hugh Robertson.
For transfers, executive director Marina Granovskaia, technical advisor Petr Cech and head coach Thomas Tuchel will continue to operate within the budgets set by the club.
“As far as football matters are concerned, nothing changes,” reported Solhekol.

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

The Kremlin has found itself increasingly isolated in recent days, with the U.S. and Western allies imposing an extraordinary set of measures that have sent its currency plummeting.
For some businesses, cutting ties with Russia marks the end of more than three decades of investment there following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The situation in Ukraine has prompted many to conclude that the financial and reputational risks of continuing operations in Russia are now too great.

Shell petrol station logo on Sept. 29, 2021 in Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Mike Kemp | In Pictures | Getty Images

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has prompted a fast-growing list of companies to shun Moscow, with firms scrambling to cut ties as foreign governments ratchet up punitive economic sanctions.
Russia attacked Ukraine on several fronts on Tuesday, the sixth day of the war, with a 40-mile convoy of tanks and other vehicles seen threatening the capital city of Kyiv. President Vladimir Putin’s troops continue to run into stiff Ukrainian resistance, however.

The Kremlin has found itself increasingly isolated in recent days, with the U.S. and Western allies imposing an extraordinary set of measures that have sent its currency plummeting.
The confluence of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent barrage of Western sanctions has triggered a mass corporate exodus from Moscow.
In an extraordinary 24-hour period through to Monday, European energy majors BP, Shell and Equinor all announced plans to bring an end to joint ventures in Russia.
“We are shocked by the loss of life in Ukraine, which we deplore, resulting from a senseless act of military aggression which threatens European security,” Shell CEO Ben van Beurden said on Monday.
Equinor President and CEO Anders Opedal said on Monday that the firm had decided to stop new investments into Russia because its position had become “untenable.”

BP Chair Helge Lund said on Sunday that Russia’s military action represents “a fundamental change” and the firm’s 19.75% stake in Russian-controlled oil company Rosneft “simply cannot continue.”

What are the limits now to economic decoupling from [the] West?

Nigel Gould-Davies
Senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia at the International Institute for Strategic Studies

“This is astonishing,” Nigel Gould-Davies, senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said via Twitter shortly after Shell announced it would exit all its Russian operations.
“What are the limits now to economic decoupling from [the] West?” Gould-Davies said.
Global bank HSBC, France’s Société Générale and South Korea’s Shinhan Bank have all wound down their relationships with a host of Russian banks, putting Western sanctions on interbank messaging system SWIFT into practice.
Swedish automaker Volvo has said it will suspend car shipments to Russia until further notice, while Germany’s Daimler Truck said on Monday it would immediately freeze its business activities in the country.
The world’s biggest aircraft leasing firm AerCap said on Monday it would cease leasing activity with Russian airlines, complying with applicable sanctions against Moscow.

A Volvo badge and parking-assist camera on the grille of an automobile at a Volvo Cars AB dealership in Stockholm, Sweden, on Thursday, Aug. 19, 2021.
Mikael Sjoberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

U.S. payment card firms Visa and Mastercard have blocked multiple Russian financial institutions from their network, following government sanctions over the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine.
Shipping giant Maersk on Tuesday said it would temporarily halt all container shipping deliveries to and from Russia in response to Western sanctions, according to Reuters. The company had previously warned it was considering a possible suspension to all bookings to and from Russia.
A spokesperson for Maersk was not immediately available to comment when contacted by CNBC.
Investors are also pulling out of Russian firms. Norway’s $1.3 trillion sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, said on Sunday it would divest its Russian assets, while Australia’s sovereign wealth fund has announced plans to wind down Russian holdings.

‘History will judge them accordingly’

For some, cutting ties with Russia marks the end of more than three decades of investment there following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The situation in Ukraine has prompted many to conclude that the financial and reputational risks of continuing operations in Russia are now too great.
Speaking to CNBC’s Hadley Gamble in an interview on Monday, Ukraine Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba implored all firms still doing business with Russia to immediately cut ties.
“The world will judge them accordingly. And history will judge them accordingly,” Kuleba said.

It comes as pressure mounts on the firms that have not yet taken action. In the energy space, for example, France’s TotalEnergies and U.S. giant ExxonMobil are now the only remaining supermajors with significant drilling operations in Russia.
When asked about these two companies, Kuleba replied: “I can call, urge, them and all other businesses. If they want to save peace, if they want to save lives of civilians, they must stop making business with Russia.”
“Cut off your business with Russia. If you have moral ground, do it immediately without any delay. Trading with Russia is financing aggression, murder of civilians and destruction of peaceful cities,” he added.
TotalEnergies on Tuesday condemned Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine and said it would no longer provide capital for new projects in Russia.
“TotalEnergies supports the scope and strength of the sanctions put in place by Europe and will implement them regardless of the consequences (currently being assessed) on its activities in Russia,” the company said.
A spokesperson for ExxonMobil was not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC.

Shell has said it will exit all its Russian operations, including the flagship Sakhalin 2 LNG plant in which it holds a 27.5% stake — and which is 50% owned and operated by Russian gas giant Gazprom. The company also announced plans to end its involvement in the highly contentious Nord Stream 2 pipeline project.
— CNBC’s Matt Clinch contributed to this report.

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

Monday – Friday, 6:00 – 7:00 PM ET

HP Inc. is keeping its buyback program in place, CEO Enrique Lores told CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Monday.
“We continue to believe the value of our shares is undervalued,” Lores said on “Mad Money.”
HP Inc. on Monday also delivered a top and bottom line beat for its fiscal 2022 first quarter.

HP Inc. CEO Enrique Lores told CNBC’s Jim Cramer on Monday that the company is keeping its stock buyback program in place, contending it remains a good use of corporate cash even with shares up 18% over the past 12 months.
“We continue to believe the value of our shares is undervalued, and, therefore, that buying HP shares is a good investment for investors,” Lores said in a “Mad Money” interview after the company reported better-than-expected results for its fiscal 2022 first quarter, which ended Jan. 31.

Earnings per share of $1.10 beat Wall Street’s forecast by 8 cents, according to Refinitiv, while quarterly revenues of $17.02 billion eclipsed analyst projections of $16.5 billion. In addition, the company returned $1.8 billion to shareholders in the quarter, with $1.5 billion by way of stock buybacks, Lores said.
Lores’ comments came in response to Cramer’s inquiry about whether buying back stock “still makes sense all the way up here.” On Jan. 12, the stock hit its all-time high of $39.65 per share, but it’s come down a bit since then during a period of overall market volatility.
HP Inc. shares closed Monday’s session at $34.36 apiece, putting its year-to-date declines at nearly 9%.
“We have committed to buy at least $4 billion of shares this year,” Lores said. “We are going to continue to execute our plan because, again, we think it’s a good investment,” he added.
HP Inc. shares trade at 8.1 times forward earnings, according to FactSet, which is below their five-year average of 9.4. The stock also supports a 2.9% dividend yield, based on Monday’s closing price.

Sign up now for the CNBC Investing Club to follow Jim Cramer’s every move in the market.

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

New York state officials found the effectiveness of Pfizer’s vaccine against Covid infection plummeted from 68% to 12% for children aged 5 to 11 during the omicron surge.
The dramatic drop in vaccine effectiveness was likely due to the lower dosage the youngsters received, according to study team members.
The data comes as New York City plans to end its school mask mandate by March 7.

Nora Gossett, 7, reacts as she receives the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine from Sophia Jan, MD, while her father Jeff Gossett, MD, holds her hand at Cohen Children’s Medical Center as vaccines were approved for children aged 5-11, amid the coronavirus disease pandemic, in New Hyde Park, New York, November 4, 2021.
Andrew Kelly | Reuters

Pfizer and BioNTech’s two-dose Covid vaccine provided very little protection for children aged 5 to 11 during the wave of omicron infection in New York, according to a study published Monday.
The New York State Department of Health found that the effectiveness of Pfizer’s vaccine against Covid infection plummeted from 68% to 12% for kids in that age group during the omicron surge from Dec. 13 through Jan 24. Protection against hospitalization dropped from 100% to 48% during the same period.

The study has not yet undergone peer review, the academic gold standard. Due to the public health urgency of the pandemic, scientists have been publishing the results of their studies before such review.
The team of public health officials who conducted the study said the dramatic drop in vaccine effectiveness among children 5 to 11 years old was likely due to the lower dosage they received. Kids in this age group are given two 10-microgram shots, while children aged 12 to 17 receive 30-microgram shots.

The researchers also compared 11 and 12 year olds during the weekend ended Jan. 30. They found the vaccine effectiveness plunged to 11% for the low-dosage group but offered 67% protection to the group that received the higher dose.
“Given rapid loss of protection against infections, these results highlight the continued importance of layered protections, including mask wearing, for children to prevent infection and transmission,” the public health officials wrote in the study.
For children aged 12 to 17 years old, vaccine effectiveness against infection dropped from 66% to 51% from December through the end of January. Protection against hospitalization dropped from 85% to 73% for teenagers during the same period.

The data comes as New York City plans to end its school mask mandate by March 7, with California doing the same four days later. State governments are easing mandates and restrictions as Covid infections decline dramatically after the omicron variant swept the nation in December and January
Covid infections are down 91% from a pandemic high in January. The U.S. reported a daily average of nearly 66,000 new infections on Sunday, compared to the more than 802,000 on Jan. 15, according to a CNBC analysis of data from Johns Hopkins University.
The U.S. suffered a spike in hospitalizations of children with Covid during the omicron wave. The Food and Drug Administration sought to fast track Pfizer’s vaccine for kids aged six months through 4 years old this month in response to the number of children hospitalized with Covid.
However, the FDA and Pfizer decided to put those plans on hold after data on the first two doses did not meet expectations. The FDA is now waiting to see clinical trial data on a third dose for the youngest kids, which is expected in April.

CNBC Health & Science

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

The Walt Disney Company will halt all future theatrical film releases in Russia following the country’s attack on Ukraine.
This includes the upcoming Pixar film “Turning Red.”

Still from Pixar’s “Turning Red.”

The Walt Disney Company will halt all future theatrical film releases in Russia following the country’s attack on Ukraine.
“Given the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and the tragic humanitarian crisis, we are pausing the release of theatrical films in Russia, including the upcoming ‘Turning Red’ from Pixar,” the company said in a statement Monday. “We will make future business decisions based on the evolving situation.

“In the meantime, given the scale of the emerging refugee crises, we are working with our NGO partners to provide urgent aid and other humanitarian assistance to refugees,” Disney said.
Disney is the first major Hollywood studio to take a hard stance against Russia in the wake of its invasion of Ukraine. Warner Bros., for example, is expected to debut “The Batman” in the country this week.
While ticket sales in Russia are not as significant as those drummed up in China, it is still a prominent market for Disney. “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” a co-production with Sony, has tallied more than $50 million in the country.
Disney’s decision to forego releases in Russia comes amid a wave of other boycotts from the entertainment industry.
Streaming giant Netflix said it will not comply with Russian rules to carry news channels amid the escalating Russian invasion in Ukraine.

“Given the current situation, we have no plans to add these channels to our service,” a Netflix spokesperson told CNBC on Monday. The decision comes as a wave of Russian state-backed news broadcasts spread Russian propaganda justifying the war Moscow started in Ukraine last week.
Sports organizations and professional athletes are also hitting Russia with their own kinds of sanctions. Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) joined the Union of European Football Associations to announce it would bar Russian teams from events, including the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, until further notice.
The National Hockey League, which has more than two dozen Russian-born hockey players, has suspended agreements with Russian companies and the International Olympic Committee also recommended banning Russian teams from competitions for violating the “Olympic Truce.”

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

Monday – Friday, 6:00 – 7:00 PM ET

It’s that time again! “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer rings the lightning round bell, which means he’s giving his answers to callers’ stock questions at rapid speed.

Loading chart…

Oceaneering International Inc.: “It’s right here. There are a lot of times when I look at these stocks and I think, ‘Well, they have contracts, the contracts could go bad.’ I think these guys are very good.”

Loading chart…

Tellurian Inc: “Here’s what matters with Tellurian: their balance sheet. It’s not great. They have to raise a lot more debt. But when they are finished, there will be ready customers.”

Loading chart…

Equitrans Midstream Corp: “It was down for multiple days, it yields [9%]. I’m worried about a 9% yielder. It makes me feel like it’s not sustainable.”

Loading chart…

AT&T Inc: “Maybe for the long-term, there’s something there. Short-term, no. Short-term, [“Mad Money”] is a family show, so I can’t really go into it. It’s just not right.”

Loading chart…

Lazard Ltd: “Jimmy Chill likes Lazard. I think that this is an opportunity, not a negative. I like it, I think it can do well.”

Loading chart…

Doximity Inc: “Doximity, I think is very inexpensive. … Doximity’s a high-growth stock, people don’t like them. But one day they will.”

WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More