Shame we don't know more about Sir Martins offer. Why the cloak and dagger? And why has JT not chose to back 2 Chelsea fans leading their own bid?

Marina Granovskaia is expected to stay at Chelsea this summer to oversee the transfer window. [Sky Sports] #CFC
 

The 3 remaining bidding groups would value Granovskaia’s input this summer even if it was temporarily. [Sky Sports] #CFC

Marina will most probably leave us anyway. She had a long history with Roman so it would be strange if she remained at the club. The new owners will bring their own people.

18 hours ago, Zeta said:

I have no idea who would be best. They all seem basically the same, funded by a group and investment companies. Very Glazer-esque.

That’s the nail on the head.

Choose your poison.

https://news.sky.com/story/chelsea-fc-sale-ex-chancellor-osborne-signs-up-to-advise-boehly-bid-12591267

2 hours ago, Kantesmini said:

https://news.sky.com/story/chelsea-fc-sale-ex-chancellor-osborne-signs-up-to-advise-boehly-bid-12591267

That’ll be the average fan getting alienated even more then - a Tory chancellor speciality is screwing over the ‘orrible riff raff. 

The Boehly bid would seem to be our best bet right now.

Boehly/Walter have the sports management pedigree, Goldstein is the resident Brit with building expertise, Clearlake provide the heavy capital. You'd suspect even Wyss may have useful political links to UEFA/FIFA, on the mere basis of being a rich Swiss.

It's not the ideal bid by any stretch of the imagination, and surrounded by question marks - foremostly, how prominent is their motivation for return on investment?

Still, the fact that it's the best bid of a not-particularly-great bunch seems indisputable.

1 hour ago, Fatty_Speeding said:

The Boehly bid would seem to be our best bet right now.

Boehly/Walter have the sports management pedigree, Goldstein is the resident Brit with building expertise, Clearlake provide the heavy capital. You'd suspect even Wyss may have useful political links to UEFA/FIFA, on the mere basis of being a rich Swiss.

It's not the ideal bid by any stretch of the imagination, and surrounded by question marks - foremostly, how prominent is their motivation for return on investment?

Still, the fact that it's the best bid of a not-particularly-great bunch seems indisputable.

And they’ve got the Spud supporter in it, which would not sit well among the Chelsea fan base and could surface every time we hit a bad run.

1 hour ago, RMH said:

And they’ve got the Spud supporter in it, which would not sit well among the Chelsea fan base and could surface every time we hit a bad run.

I really don't care. I would value his expertise over that. 

5 minutes ago, evissy said:

I really don't care. I would value his expertise over that. 

I don't mind either as long as he is not the public face at Chelsea. But I was just responding to the comment 'surrounded by question marks - foremostly, how prominent is their motivation for return on investment?'. Yes, the most important is the return of investment, but there's also been a lot of noise about Goldstein being a Spud.

With Bohley out primary owner would be Clearlake, who are in the business of making money. 

With that being the case I would expect them, after the short or maybe medium term, to focus on returns and run us like Arsenal, or maybe United.

Not saying the others are better or would do different but as majority owners Clearlake could make those calls and no one could stop them.

when ex politicians start  circling  you know we are in for a bad time  i can see many chelsea protests ahead   

5 minutes ago, dellaw said:

when ex politicians start  circling  you know we are in for a bad time  i can see many chelsea protests ahead   

Maybe why JT sided with Pagliuca. Maybe we should start hoping they win as the other 2 bids are politically powered.

Here is the BBC take on our prospective new owners' bids:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61098633

Seems apart from the Ricketts who have now gone, all the other bids are backed by investment firms who are in the business of making money... Yes they may have untold Billions in assets under management, but that is not their money!! God help us if we are run anything like United...it's not that the Glazers don't invest, it's more they don't have the right people running the club...hopefully buck/marina stay on board and hand over the reigns properly if the do leave.

 

1 hour ago, Trueblue76 said:

Seems apart from the Ricketts who have now gone, all the other bids are backed by investment firms who are in the business of making money... Yes they may have untold Billions in assets under management, but that is not their money!! God help us if we are run anything like United...it's not that the Glazers don't invest, it's more they don't have the right people running the club...hopefully buck/marina stay on board and hand over the reigns properly if the do leave.

 

I wouldn't mind Marina staying alongside Cech even if its just a temporary year position to help with the transition of ownership, Buck though I wouldn't mind him leaving given the mishaps with the FA cup Middlesbrough game. The timing of that just shows he is incapable of running the club.

2 hours ago, Trueblue76 said:

Seems apart from the Ricketts who have now gone, all the other bids are backed by investment firms who are in the business of making money... Yes they may have untold Billions in assets under management, but that is not their money!! God help us if we are run anything like United...it's not that the Glazers don't invest, it's more they don't have the right people running the club...hopefully buck/marina stay on board and hand over the reigns properly if the do leave.

 

Exactly, these investment companies aren’t throwing their hat in the ring to make a loss, three billion takes a lot of repaying before it shows a profit.

7 hours ago, Trueblue76 said:

Seems apart from the Ricketts who have now gone, all the other bids are backed by investment firms who are in the business of making money... Yes they may have untold Billions in assets under management, but that is not their money!! God help us if we are run anything like United...it's not that the Glazers don't invest, it's more they don't have the right people running the club...hopefully buck/marina stay on board and hand over the reigns properly if the do leave.

 

If they want to make money, the current board will be the first on the chopping block ... they've effectively run up a £1.5 billion deficit since Roman took ownership  ... they might stick around in the short term for "transition" purposes, but longer than that ... I just can't see it myself !

Edited April 17, 20224 yr by Sexyfootball

On 16/04/2022 at 16:31, RMH said:

And they’ve got the Spud supporter in it, which would not sit well among the Chelsea fan base and could surface every time we hit a bad run.

Apparently some of the senior people at Chelsea and Roman’s inner circle are spurs fans. It doesn’t make any difference who they support. At their level, They’ll be judged on the results - not who they support

16 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

If they want to make money, the current board will be the first on the chopping block ... they've effectively run up a £1.5 billion deficit since Roman took ownership  ... they might stick around in the short term for "transition" purposes, but longer than that ... I just can't see it myself !

Exactly...Without the loans where would we be now, to be fair the money spent in the transfer windows post 2012 has been in the main wasted...with the exception of Kante, Azpi, Hazard, Mendy, Costa, Rudiger, Havertz, Chilwell etc....for everyone of them there has been a Lukaku, Barkley, Drinkwater, Bakayoko, Alonso. Marina is great at getting a decent fee for players but too many times have we had deadwood on the books...Put all that together and allowing two of the world's best players to leave in De Bruyne and Salah the transfer business has been 50/50 in my opinion....much better to use the academy going forward for squad fillers and only target the best of what's needed.  There will definitely be a shift in the club trying to generate more income, whether that be a Man City model and Stadium redevelopment I can't say..but I'd still say the future is looking bright and hopefully we get the right people in place to take us forward

8 hours ago, Trueblue76 said:

Exactly...Without the loans where would we be now, to be fair the money spent in the transfer windows post 2012 has been in the main wasted...with the exception of Kante, Azpi, Hazard, Mendy, Costa, Rudiger, Havertz, Chilwell etc....for everyone of them there has been a Lukaku, Barkley, Drinkwater, Bakayoko, Alonso. Marina is great at getting a decent fee for players but too many times have we had deadwood on the books...Put all that together and allowing two of the world's best players to leave in De Bruyne and Salah the transfer business has been 50/50 in my opinion....much better to use the academy going forward for squad fillers and only target the best of what's needed.  There will definitely be a shift in the club trying to generate more income, whether that be a Man City model and Stadium redevelopment I can't say..but I'd still say the future is looking bright and hopefully we get the right people in place to take us forward

Cannot lump in Alonso as a waste of money! He has contributed huge amounts to the club and has helped us win a number of trophies. Although he has a lot of flaws, cannot say he hasn't been a decent purchase, and certainly not the waste of money like some of the others you mentioned 

It’s depressing that we’ve spent ALOT of money and our forward line still needs more work. The £160m spent on Werner and Lukaku ranks as one of the worst buys. We just can’t buy forwards. 
 

Im hoping the new owners can sort that issue out. 

1 hour ago, JM7 said:

It’s depressing that we’ve spent ALOT of money and our forward line still needs more work. The £160m spent on Werner and Lukaku ranks as one of the worst buys. We just can’t buy forwards. 
 

Im hoping the new owners can sort that issue out. 

Just give cacku away, nothing lost to the new owners, basically saving £350k/week

On 16/04/2022 at 15:09, Munkworth said:

That’ll be the average fan getting alienated even more then - a Tory chancellor speciality is screwing over the ‘orrible riff raff. 

He is actually a Chelsea fan. Have seen him at SB on a couple odd occasions sat  alongside Danny Finklestien

Edited April 18, 20224 yr by terraloon

On 17/04/2022 at 01:00, charierre said:

Exactly, these investment companies aren’t throwing their hat in the ring to make a loss, three billion takes a lot of repaying before it shows a profit.

If you look at it objectively RA has seen a 100% return on his investment over a20 year period and had he just taken a little more care with transfers that were bound to fail then the return would have been even greater.

These American investors aren’t daft nor will they be looking to take the odd million or so the big bucks will come through TV and I don’t mean Sky or BT  which will almost certainly form the basis of the collective deal going forward but  at some point clubs will be allowed to negotiate their own rights maybe not as I say in the UK but likely in the likes of the US , Asia and Africa.