4 hours ago, JM7 said:

Listening to a podcast, they were saying Roman will likely keep the money the club will sell for. Obviously not all of it and won’t take any “profit” from the sale. The statement about “net proceeds” was suitable vague. 

Not sure how Roman will get to keep a penny when the government has his assets frozen. Unless he is planning to store the money in a sanctioned account and hopes he might be able to regain access in the future once the war is over?

6 hours ago, JM7 said:

Listening to a podcast, they were saying Roman will likely keep the money the club will sell for. Obviously not all of it and won’t take any “profit” from the sale. The statement about “net proceeds” was suitable vague. 

Presumably the £1.5 billion that is owed to Fordstam ?

Then you'll have the fees for Raine (no doubt disproportionately huge in relation to the amount of actual "work" they have done on this), and the usual scenario is all sorts of similar "fees" for various directors, executives, consultants, lawyers, etc etc. Leaving a small amount for the war victims, who are probably all on the Russian side.

Got my cynical hat firmly in place here :-) 

4 hours ago, forbzy said:

Not sure how Roman will get to keep a penny when the government has his assets frozen. Unless he is planning to store the money in a sanctioned account and hopes he might be able to regain access in the future once the war is over?

Yeah they’ve “frozen” not seized his assets. Presumably at some point, they will lift it and he can claim some of his money. The original impression we got is that he was going to walk away from £3b and give it all to charity. I don’t think that is necessarily the case. 

Boehly group remains unconcerned by the Sir Jim Ratcliffe bid, which lacks detail and has bypassed the process. Boehly will enter into a period of exclusivity now to try and sign a purchase agreement and is confident of completing a sale before May 31.

Ratcliffe really can’t do anything and although his late bid might be genuine it lacks substance. He has carried out no due diligence and given no written assurances as to his plans for Nice. Even if he was successful, it’d take time to resolve that matter. #CFC don’t have.

The Boehly bid have exclusivity, in a period when Chelsea need to wrap up a sale. It’s only my view, but entertaining another suitor, outside of the process when an urgent sale is needed, would be counter-productive not to mention very bad optics.
 

From Ben Jacobs

8 hours ago, forbzy said:

Not sure how Roman will get to keep a penny when the government has his assets frozen. Unless he is planning to store the money in a sanctioned account and hopes he might be able to regain access in the future once the war is over?

The US hasn’t frozen his assets as far as I know, so he could be very well paid into an account there and get his money. 

2 hours ago, RMH said:

The US hasn’t frozen his assets as far as I know, so he could be very well paid into an account there and get his money. 

If that is the case then this whole UK government action will be shown up for the total farce that is was.

Someone over at wagnh posted this in the comment section and I think it's a good video providing insight into Todd's mindset behind acquiring a prem club. 

If he's a genuine man which I'd like to think he is from watching this video, I would say we would be in good hands. Sounds like all the right reasons to invest with an emphasis on the importance of the fans.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2019-09-09/why-l-a-dodgers-owner-todd-boehly-wants-to-buy-a-premier-league-club-video

 

Thanks for sharing that video. He seems like person who understands how it works. With him we can maintain our status and grow globally. 

He said win first which tells he understands how to grow.

59 minutes ago, forbzy said:

If that is the case then this whole UK government action will be shown up for the total farce that is was.

We’ll, it’s all a farce, like stealing a rich man’s Rolex while keep paying millions for his oil and gas. But, as of today, there are no US sanctions on him that I can find in the news.

On 25/04/2022 at 19:09, terraloon said:

Nope not a Civil  Servant just someone that reads past the banner headline.

Far too many have and to a degree still are fighting against the inevitable all that will come from that is they will become more and  more bitter when the reality is had the Salisbury incident not happened and then the invasion of Ukraine HM Government would not have taken the actions they have.

Gov have forced Wimbledon to ban Russian players because Russian! the wta etc are considering punishing Wimbledon for it...

On Sunday, Rafael Nadal similarly branded the Wimbledon ban "very unfair", adding: "My Russian tennis mates, my colleagues. It's not their fault what's happening in this moment with the war."

Wimbledon officials reiterated their position last week, saying that a directive from the government regarding the invasion of Ukraine had left them with no viable alternative but to refuse entries from players from the two countries.

There has been some support for Wimbledon's position, especially from Ukrainians within tennis, but the reaction has been largely negative, with the ATP and WTA , the governing bodies of the men's and women's professional tennis circuits, both deciding whether to impose penalties.

Action against Wimbledon and the preceding grass-court tournaments run by the Lawn Tennis Association could include the removal of ranking points.

1 hour ago, forbzy said:

If that is the case then this whole UK government action will be shown up for the total farce that is was.

Rant warning:

It was a joke when the bbc put out a big hype about the panorama they did and it was an absolute wet stinky fart, No actual evidence about anything connecting roman to putin as his lap dog, Nothing new or not known.

Don't forget it wasn't that long ago we burned witches and lopped off the heads of anyone for bledy anything, Imagine we never stopped all that in the west, You could just drum up a hate party on twitter and get anyone you can think of a date with the executioner instead its isolation and monetary warfare against those who trespass.

I think this is putin and his minions on their way out, They're burning all the bridges and having a party while they still can!

Don't get me started about how its all being funded or the swiss protecting his entire family in ridiculously expensive mansions and europe literally funding the war on both sides!

I hate this trend towards mixing politics into feckin footie, Only got mental when the money started getting mental!

If the US Republicans get back in then Ukraine might calm down, it was well known if the Democrats got in Ukraine would be an issue.

The sad thing is I think RA might never see his funds again as I think the Sanctions will stay in place for some time, though perhaps his son might benefit. 

 

 

7 minutes ago, strider6004 said:

If the US Republicans get back in then Ukraine might calm down, it was well known if the Democrats got in Ukraine would be an issue.

The sad thing is I think RA might never see his funds again as I think the Sanctions will stay in place for some time, though perhaps his son might benefit. 

 

 

I think you're holding the Americans a tad high in that regard, Its looking like rona and geopolitics played a big part of this whole invasion, It kicked off in 2014 and its all about territory and resources (money) 

Yeah ok Biden being literally grandpa from the Simpsons didn't help and trump would of probably found a way to appease madvlad but it looks far deeper tbh, China and Europe have been sending warehouses of cash before and since it all kicked off.

Its a new 'axis of evil' if you like and the west literally paid for it all, Its nuts!

30 minutes ago, Kantesmini said:

I think you're holding the Americans a tad high in that regard, Its looking like rona and geopolitics played a big part of this whole invasion, It kicked off in 2014 and its all about territory and resources (money) 

Yeah ok Biden being literally grandpa from the Simpsons didn't help and trump would of probably found a way to appease madvlad but it looks far deeper tbh, China and Europe have been sending warehouses of cash before and since it all kicked off.

Its a new 'axis of evil' if you like and the west literally paid for it all, Its nuts!

And Biden's son was involved in a Ukraine energy company fraud, Biden had the prosecutor removed in return for American aid when he was vice President

Edited May 2, 20224 yr by The Rising Sun
Correction

2 hours ago, LongtimerLurker said:

Someone over at wagnh posted this in the comment section and I think it's a good video providing insight into Todd's mindset behind acquiring a prem club. 

If he's a genuine man which I'd like to think he is from watching this video, I would say we would be in good hands. Sounds like all the right reasons to invest with an emphasis on the importance of the fans.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2019-09-09/why-l-a-dodgers-owner-todd-boehly-wants-to-buy-a-premier-league-club-video

 

Fits in with a few things I've read about what happened when he and his group bought the Dodgers, and it's been pretty much ideal for their fans ever since, they've gone from being outside the top spenders in the sport to comfortably the biggest, and gave beein involved in the play offs thingy the past 9 seasons,  winning titles during that period.

I still feel the Americam owners at Liverpool, utd and a few others, plus this group at Chelsea are all angling for a change in TV rights where each club will have their own channel, or sell their own games to host channels, that's why they are in it, that's where the big money is.

Can we not have the ridiculous American politics bollocks in this thread, start another one if you want to chat sh*t about it please.

Edited May 2, 20224 yr by dkw

9 hours ago, JM7 said:

Boehly group remains unconcerned by the Sir Jim Ratcliffe bid, which lacks detail and has bypassed the process. Boehly will enter into a period of exclusivity now to try and sign a purchase agreement and is confident of completing a sale before May 31.

Ratcliffe really can’t do anything and although his late bid might be genuine it lacks substance. He has carried out no due diligence and given no written assurances as to his plans for Nice. Even if he was successful, it’d take time to resolve that matter. #CFC don’t have.

The Boehly bid have exclusivity, in a period when Chelsea need to wrap up a sale. It’s only my view, but entertaining another suitor, outside of the process when an urgent sale is needed, would be counter-productive not to mention very bad optics.
 

From Ben Jacobs

It's should be called " The Clearlake " bid. They are funding most of it .  I'm not happy about a San Franciscan investment fund buying into out club . What do they want in return for their investment ?

2 hours ago, LongtimerLurker said:

Someone over at wagnh posted this in the comment section and I think it's a good video providing insight into Todd's mindset behind acquiring a prem club. 

If he's a genuine man which I'd like to think he is from watching this video, I would say we would be in good hands. Sounds like all the right reasons to invest with an emphasis on the importance of the fans.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2019-09-09/why-l-a-dodgers-owner-todd-boehly-wants-to-buy-a-premier-league-club-video

 

Sounds like he’d have been a good choice back in 2019, 3 years on I’m sure he’s even better equipped. 
 

The only potential drawback is what Clearlake plan on doing.

12 minutes ago, dkw said:

Fits in with a few things I've read about what happened when he and his group bought the Dodgers, and it's been pretty much ideal for their fans ever since, they've gone from being outside the top spenders in the sport to comfortably the biggest, and gave beein involved in the play offs thingy the past 9 seasons,  winning titles during that period.

I still feel the Americam owners at Liverpool, utd and a few others, plus this group at Chelsea are all angling for a change in TV rights where each club will have their own channel, or sell their own games to host channels, that's why they are in it, that's where the big money is.

Can we not have the ridiculous American politics bollocks in this thread, start another one if you want to chat sh*t about it please.

I fully expect the usual suspects to try the Super League breakaway again soon. Its the only way they can think of to make more money from the game. It will probably go through next time too. Whether that includes us remains to be seen.

9 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

It's should be called " The Clearlake " bid. They are funding most of it .  I'm not happy about a San Franciscan investment fund buying into out club . What do they want in return for their investment ?

A Chelsea fan asked a Clearlake spokesman about this. His answer is below:

 

2 hours ago, LongtimerLurker said:

Someone over at wagnh posted this in the comment section and I think it's a good video providing insight into Todd's mindset behind acquiring a prem club. 

If he's a genuine man which I'd like to think he is from watching this video, I would say we would be in good hands. Sounds like all the right reasons to invest with an emphasis on the importance of the fans.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2019-09-09/why-l-a-dodgers-owner-todd-boehly-wants-to-buy-a-premier-league-club-video

 

To be honest if Boehly invests similar to how Liverpool do I think I'd actually be more hopeful of eventually competing with City/Liverpool than if we carried on our previous approach.

This season showed the difference in both our transfer policies. They identified an ideal stylistic fit while we just looked at the top line and didn't factor in how Lukaku wouldn't fit our style (or naively thought we could adapt him).

Unless it's someone like prime Hazard or Mbappe who's so good the stylistic compromise won't matter then we have to identify suitable players only.

Edited May 2, 20224 yr by Argo

6 minutes ago, Argo said:

To be honest if Boehly invests similar to how Liverpool do I think I'd actually be more hopeful of eventually competing with City/Liverpool than if we carried on our previous approach.

This season showed the difference in both our transfer policies. They identified an ideal stylistic fit while we just looked at the top line and didn't factor in how Lukaku wouldn't fit our style (or naively thought we could adapt him).

Unless it's someone like prime Hazard or Mbappe who's so good the stylistic compromise won't won't matter then we have to identify suitable players only.

Agreed mate. Lukaku was the final straw for me with how we used to do transfers. Such a waste of money while letting talents like Marc G go.

Just now, axman2526 said:

Agreed mate. Lukaku was the final straw for me with how we used to do transfers. Such a waste of money while letting talents like Marc G go.

I was quite hopeful in summer 2020 that we were learning (ok Werner and Ziyech hasn't worked out as planned but on paper they suited the way we play) but the Lukaku signing totally knocked me, that one wasn't even hindsight.

Even though I didn't want him then either I understood the logic in 2017, to get him last summer when we are a high press interchanging team was mindblowing.

3 minutes ago, Argo said:

I was quite hopeful in summer 2020 that we were learning (ok Werner and Ziyech hasn't worked out as planned but on paper they suited the way we play) but the Lukaku signing totally knocked me, that one wasn't even hindsight.

Even though I didn't want him then either I understood the logic in 2017, to get him last summer when we are a high press interchanging team was mindblowing.

Add Saul to that, I called his loan and wages would be a huge waste before he arrived and so it has shown. This summer was an epic disaster that made us weaker by far.

Sadly for us we are saddled with Werner and his high wages, which I think are at a ridiculous 275k a week. Possibly with Ziyech too. 

I hope the new owners take the time needed (2, 3 or 4 years whatever is left) and get big earners like them off the books while either letting Kante go or his new deal a heck of a lot loss than the 300k he is on.

Such money should only be for the player Kante was, or Salah, or KdB, or Mbappe. Not Flippin Werner, Lukaku et al.

The Times can reveal that Todd Boehly’s consortium has now been granted a 5 day exclusivity period to fulfil contractual agreements. 

Jim Ratcliffe has been dismissed by Chelsea and Raine, a source said. ( @Lawton_Times )

Given new owners and the debt being wiped what does this mean for selling the likes of Lukaku, Kepa etc?  If all the finances are started from scratch wouldn’t selling Lukaku and the like be profit only no matter what we get for them unless we still owe money?  Trying to get a high transfer fee would only be needed to generate money for other transfers or saving face.  I’m probably wrong but hopefully we can use this as a clean slate to get rid of all our past mistakes and overpaid rejects.