26 minutes ago, JM7 said:

BREAKING! The Ricketts-led consortium has withdrawn its bid to buy Chelsea, the group has confirmed in a statement.

The Chicago Cubs owners and their partners opted not to submit a final bid for the Blues, with consortium members understood to be unable to agree the final composition of their offer.

- @NickPurewal
 

Saves the inevitable backlash should they have been successful.

Maybe felt forced to withdraw bid. 

I expect Todd and co to be announced at sometime.

15 minutes ago, Mana said:

Yep the Ricketts have pulled out confirmed.

Can’t say I’m not relieved, last thing the club needed was another circus around its ownership 

49 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Can’t say I’m not relieved, last thing the club needed was another circus around its ownership 

I disagree.

Ricketts have ignored the fans backlash, and went to all this effort only to realise they can’t even put in a final bid. If they managed to get ownership, can you imagine what they’d be like? And the circus, how? We now have 1 less bidder, it narrows down the list, we are closer to finding the owner.

Great news! Now if it is only confirmed that Clearlake won't have 50% stake in Boehly's bid, it would be perfect. 

1 hour ago, dansubrosa said:

I disagree.

Ricketts have ignored the fans backlash, and went to all this effort only to realise they can’t even put in a final bid. If they managed to get ownership, can you imagine what they’d be like? And the circus, how? We now have 1 less bidder, it narrows down the list, we are closer to finding the owner.

You’ve completely misunderstood my post?

Think it’s the best news we could have hoped for. Despite the money, there’s too much negativity around the bid and the way they operate. 
 

Based on what I know, Boehley appears to be easiest and best. Seems to want to keep us elite/competitive 

Ricketts pulling out should speed up the process since it's one less bid to scrutinize for the PL. The sooner this is done the better!

5 hours ago, terraloon said:

From my understanding there are different arrangements in place but in effect other clubs act as agents and will collect payments .. I think, at am not 100% sure that away fans money while under licence  will be donated to charity again I think that is very much the case for the FACup matches and the CL game. Normally after a small % which the away clubs keep to cover their expenses the money is paid to the club hosting the match

Season Ticket holders paid their money months ago so not really an issue.

For the FACup semi the bulk of the proceeds go to the FA. The four participating clubs gave significantly more prize money even if they loose

Cheers mate. So I had understood well that, generally, the away tickets money go mostly to the home side. Though, in this case, it’s going to be kept by the away teams and ultimately go to charity. Fair enough, but to me it seems like Chelsea is being robbed as the club does not only have to pay for the security, practicalities of opening the away stand and catering for the away fans but it does not receive any money at all for it to cover costs (I know that the catering is paid for in advance and that’s why we have been able to buy beer and food inside  the Bridge). So basically Chelsea is now running a charity for the away teams. Did they have any option to refuse away fans unless Chelsea fans were also allowed to buy tickets? I can’t imagine that it is that difficult to set up an account for the money to go in and not to let that go to the Club. As we say in my country “Encima de puta puta pongo la cama” when we are being despised and abused.

Anyway, since the Ricketts family has pulled out, I hope that the process speeds up and we can start going back to the normal run of business and get supporters back to the stadium asap.

The ones with most money pull out because they cannot figure out how to put the package together.

Well good thing they did not get in then.

That leaves:

Early front runners Bohley-Wyss

Sir Martin and Lord Coe with his political power 

Stephan Pagliuca and the backing of true blue.

Even field it looks like.

Reports are Raine are hopeful of putting forward a preferred bidder on Monday or Tuesday.

Even though it is not official some have claimed the PL will have no issue approving any of the 3 remaining bids, and that the Ricketts one was going to be the most difficult to see through.

The government will be happy to amend the license so long as things are put in place that the money either goes to a frozen account or to charity to support war victims.

All that said is why Raine want to aim for Monday or Tuesday.

13 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

The ones with most money pull out because they cannot figure out how to put the package together.

Well good thing they did not get in then.

That leaves:

Early front runners Bohley-Wyss

Sir Martin and Lord Coe with his political power 

Stephan Pagliuca and the backing of true blue.

Even field it looks like.

Never really thought about the political power coe has. Wouldn't be surprised to see them win

I just want it all to be over asap

 

Glad ricketts pulled out. Though it does concern me that there are rumours that Clearlake will own 50% of Chelsea in the Boehly led consortium. 

7 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Glad ricketts pulled out. Though it does concern me that there are rumours that Clearlake will own 50% of Chelsea in the Boehly led consortium. 

And if they do fulfill the promise to grant the golden share that will make Clearlake majority owners. And yet many champion their bid?

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

3 hours ago, timetowaste said:

You’ve completely misunderstood my post?

Yeah I did. My bad! 

19 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

And if they do fulfill the promise to grant the golden share that will make Clearlake majority owners. And yet many champion their bid?

Yeah its looking highly likely that the shares of Chelsea ownership are going to look similar to the Newcastle ownership. Where PIF owns 80% and Amanda and co own the other 20% + in charge of Newcastle daily operations, it looks like Clearlake will own 50% and the other 50% will be dished out amongst Boehly and co while he is in charge of the daily operations of the club.

Just now, Frankie8Lampard said:

Yeah its looking highly likely that the shares of Chelsea ownership are going to look similar to the Newcastle ownership. Where PIF owns 80% and Amanda and co own the other 20% + in charge of Newcastle daily operations, it looks like Clearlake will own 50% and the other 50% will be dished out amongst Boehly and co while he is in charge of the daily operations of the club.

Unlike PIF we can be sure an American hedge fund company will be expecting good returns on their investment.

6 hours ago, JM7 said:

BREAKING! The Ricketts-led consortium has withdrawn its bid to buy Chelsea, the group has confirmed in a statement.

The Chicago Cubs owners and their partners opted not to submit a final bid for the Blues, with consortium members understood to be unable to agree the final composition of their offer.

- @NickPurewal
 

Hey @erskblue any reaction from the Sergeant Major yet?

Apparently, that Clearlake would have a majority of the ownership if the Boehly bid is successful has been dismissed.

32 minutes ago, RMH said:

Apparently, that Clearlake would have a majority of the ownership if the Boehly bid is successful has been dismissed.

1 hour ago, RMH said:

Apparently, that Clearlake would have a majority of the ownership if the Boehly bid is successful has been dismissed.

The reporter who reported it being dismissed has since deleted the article so I don't think its accurate. Plus more than one journalists have confirmed Clearlake owning 50% in the Boehly bid. It also makes sense in the grander scheme of things since Boehly's networth alone wouldn't be enough to both buy Chelsea and invest into all his promises.

Edited April 15, 20224 yr by Frankie8Lampard

17 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

The reporter who reported it being dismissed has since deleted the article so I don't think its accurate. Plus more than one journalists have confirmed Clearlake owning 50% in the Boehly bid. It also makes sense in the grander scheme of things since Boehly's networth alone wouldn't be enough to both buy Chelsea and invest into all his promises.

Yes, you’re right, I can only find the Sports Illustrated article, but the article it quotes has been removed.