On 17/04/2022 at 06:26, 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 !

Or looking at it another way have made £1.5 billion profit on RAs investment 

10 minutes ago, terraloon said:

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

Think we can use the term loosely where any Tory MP and fan is mentioned.

14 minutes ago, bluehaze said:

Think we can use the term loosely where any Tory MP and fan is mentioned.

He isn’t an MP

27 minutes ago, terraloon said:

He isn’t an MP

Lets not split hairs mate you know exactly what he is or if you insist was.

55 minutes ago, terraloon said:

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

Yes but more importantly he’s a Tory which overrides everything else. 

As an aside remember seeing Seb Coe on one of the FA Cup runs in either 94 or 96. 

2 hours ago, Munkworth said:

Yes but more importantly he’s a Tory which overrides everything else. 

So is Seb Coe.

59 minutes ago, dkw said:

So is Seb Coe.

Then neither bid should pass the ‘fit and proper persons’ test!

14 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

Then neither bid should pass the ‘fit and proper persons’ test!

Wonder how many on the PL boatd are Tory...

2 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Wonder how many on the PL boatd are Tory...

Well, the Russian oligarchs donated to the Tory party, so from Roman down… quite a few.

2 minutes ago, RMH said:

Well, the Russian oligarchs donated to the Tory party, so from Roman down… quite a few.

Should make Sir Martins bid the sure fire winner then.

https://news.sky.com/story/chelsea-fc-sale-brewing-heir-santo-domingo-backs-broughton-bid-12592966

3 hours ago, Munkworth said:

Then neither bid should pass the ‘fit and proper persons’ test!

It’s only a guess but I doubt that other than the very odd individual the majority of individuals involved have politics that are most certainly to the right of the political divide

 

Edited April 18, 20224 yr by terraloon

Any thoughts on Paul Mitchell?

 

On 16/04/2022 at 22:32, 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.

 

Which is very worrying as everything then becomes a question of input/risk vs reward. For example, if the new owners find that the financial input/risk required to maintain Chelsea as a genuinely elite European club is greater than they had anticipated, they may well decide that it's instead more prudent to simply let the club drift as a top 4 or even top 7 also-ran, with that attitude's minimal investment comparing well against its maintenance of decent revenue streams.

The one thing I would say to contradict this is that there's a reason investment firms - or even companies full stop - have rarely taken over football clubs for financial return alone before now, as the input/risk vs return ratio has not historically been attractive to say the least, and there's also an awful lot of bad publicity to be had if things go wrong.

So, another key question is are Clearlake Capital investing in Chelsea solely for financial return as you would normally expect them to, or do they see Chelsea as something of an exception whereby it's also a great marketing opportunity? For instance, are they also looking to enhance their reputation towards expanding their portfolio in Europe? If the latter is the case, then they may well relax their usual ROI-obsessed approach.

1 hour ago, Fatty_Speeding said:

Which is very worrying as everything then becomes a question of input/risk vs reward. For example, if the new owners find that the financial input/risk required to maintain Chelsea as a genuinely elite European club is greater than they had anticipated, they may well decide that it's instead more prudent to simply let the club drift as a top 4 or even top 7 also-ran, with that attitude's minimal investment comparing well against its maintenance of decent revenue streams.

The one thing I would say to contradict this is that there's a reason investment firms - or even companies full stop - have rarely taken over football clubs for financial return alone before now, as the input/risk vs return ratio has not historically been attractive to say the least, and there's also an awful lot of bad publicity to be had if things go wrong.

So, another key question is are Clearlake Capital investing in Chelsea solely for financial return as you would normally expect them to, or do they see Chelsea as something of an exception whereby it's also a great marketing opportunity? For instance, are they also looking to enhance their reputation towards expanding their portfolio in Europe? If the latter is the case, then they may well relax their usual ROI-obsessed approach.

It’s interesting you post this because I keep asking myself the same sort of questions 

Are we missing something ? I just cant see what the attraction  is if any of the groups expect to make a quick buck.

I am a doubter, a cynic if you like and I just don’t trust anyone.So what do they know ?
 

 

 

9 minutes ago, terraloon said:

It’s interesting you post this because I keep asking myself the same sort of questions 

Are we missing something ? I just cant see what the attraction  is if any of the groups expect to make a quick buck.

I am a doubter, a cynic if you like and I just don’t trust anyone.So what do they know.

I haven't followed all the statements yet did catch the Boehly chap early on and was impressed by what he said.

Seemed to realise TT was a top manager and you just could not throw out money to win major trophies,  it needed to be careful investment or at least that was the gist i picked up.

35 minutes ago, terraloon said:

It’s interesting you post this because I keep asking myself the same sort of questions 

Are we missing something ? I just cant see what the attraction  is if any of the groups expect to make a quick buck.

I am a doubter, a cynic if you like and I just don’t trust anyone.So what do they know ?
 

 

 

Hard to say.

Could they foresee a boom in digital income streams (NFTs/etc.)? Clearlake have certainly invested a lot in the Software & Technology space, as have Boehly's Eldridge Industries.

I suppose it is difficult to know given the situation. It’s not like they’re buying cheap and looking to sell high. They’re paying too dollar. 

The high sale price works in the clubs favour if we’re sold to an investment firm, in that scenario i actually think it might be preferable. 

If as believed we become the most expensive sports team ever, an investment firm looking to make money for their investors etc have to maintain or increase that valuation. 

Seeing as this isn’t American sports and our value is going to be closely linked to on field performance (let’s admit it, we’re not man united in a commercial sense and it would take a lot more winning to get even close). They are going to have to spend on the team, within reason, to maintain our success. If we stop competing, our overall value drops and they’ll either be forced to spend or sell at what would be quite a loss. 

So I guess we don't find out the preferred bidder today as first hoped. Guess that means we wait...and

6 hours ago, BKLYNProdigy said:

Any thoughts on Paul Mitchell?

 

FFS what is all these Spuds fans wanting to invest in us? Why can't they invest in their own club instead?

8 hours ago, Mana said:

FFS what is all these Spuds fans wanting to invest in us? Why can't they invest in their own club instead?

Because it’s the only way them c**ts will get anywhere near a trophy. 

9 hours ago, Blueboys said:

The high sale price works in the clubs favour if we’re sold to an investment firm, in that scenario i actually think it might be preferable. 

If as believed we become the most expensive sports team ever, an investment firm looking to make money for their investors etc have to maintain or increase that valuation. 

Seeing as this isn’t American sports and our value is going to be closely linked to on field performance (let’s admit it, we’re not man united in a commercial sense and it would take a lot more winning to get even close). They are going to have to spend on the team, within reason, to maintain our success. If we stop competing, our overall value drops and they’ll either be forced to spend or sell at what would be quite a loss. 

I agree with most of this. If the new owner understand the mechanics in sports in terms of it being heavily aligned with the on-field success they know challenging like we do is imperative. They also need to understand how we are positioned in England and in Europe. There is the top 6 and the rest. Getting into top 6 means you invest heavily into new players/top managers and youth development. 

We can get to MU level of global success. It just takes time. MU currently is going the other way with City taking their market. Arsenal is dropping and it seems Spurs are not catching us anytime soon.

11 hours ago, Fatty_Speeding said:

Hard to say.

Could they foresee a boom in digital income streams (NFTs/etc.)? Clearlake have certainly invested a lot in the Software & Technology space, as have Boehly's Eldridge Industries.

I don’t think there is any doubt that new owners will follow the Liverpool model and work long  and hard to improve commercial and sponsorship but I sense that the clubs owned by Americans in particular working in conjunction with clubs that have support through ownership such as Leicester will be looking to change part, not all, of the collective broadcast model will become the home clubs intellectual property