Having done a bit of consulting for Chelsea FC, I wouldn't recommend working there in an office job. Poor pay (I doubt anyone below "Head of"/CxO even touches 6 figures) and very average working conditions.

Aren’t they both owned by pompous rich dudes and private equity, like most companies? Tasty is the boot we enjoy licking.

Everything is owned by rich people, is your solution to not enjoy anything?

Actually in countries like Portugal or Germany, most clubs are owned by its members (or at the very least, 51% owned by its members), which can e.g. vote on its president.

You're not totally wrong about the 51% thing (although it's really 50% + 1 vote), but it's not like that is a panacea that keeps out corporate interests. Leverkusen and Wolfsberg are owned by Bayer and Volkswagen respectively (although I understand there's historical reasons for that) and Leipzig is 99% owned by Red Bull, but they only have 50% - 1 voting rights to comply.

Arsenal's owned by Stan Kroenke. Chelsea by Todd Boehly the LA Dodgers guy.

I thought at first that you might be bantering but after reading your last sentence I am not sure anymore. I don't think being associated with Arsenal at this posting is ever going to be a blemish on anyone's CV. They are higher than Chelsea in PL standings at this moment.

Why bantering?

150k a year puts you in the 1% earners in UK, plenty to comfortable live on.

As you mentioned, having such a job in ones CV can only help.

But, I've been a Chelsea fan for most of my life, if I take such a job at Arsenal and do it properly, I'll be actively working against the organization that brought me so many emotions over the past 30ish years.

Oh that’s a fascinating reaction I never thought of. I mean people might refuse to work for any gambling company or any arms maker, but I cannot I imagine someone offered a job in banking refuse say Goldman but take JP Morgan, simply because their family have been Morgan fans for generations and would never accept any other bank …

Not sure if you intentionally obtuse or simply don't get it. There is no reason to be a fan of an organization whose main goal is to be making money, but there are plenty of reasons to be a fan of an organization whose main goal is to be better at a sport than other similar organizations.

I don't think the distinction is about whether the organizations make money; the distinction is about entertainment. Professional sports are primarily a form of entertainment. Sports fans are a bit like music fans in that regard. The rivalries in sports can get toxic sometimes, but there's weird snobbery in music and other arts as well.

There's no reason to be a fan of an organization whose main goal is to make money, yet GP said he's a Chelsea fan.

You don't think professional soccer teams are an organization whose main goal is to make money?

If it is, and it probably isn't, they are really not very good at it.

You underestimate how much being a soccer fan means, especially in countries like UK.

So they are looking for people in the Venn diagram cross section of AI researchers and Arsenal FC supporters, of which I imagine there are very few.

I met some Americans who would never work for the New England Patriots.