September 8, 20241 yr Might be misreading this but some mates on Instagram have told me that Boehly wants to buy full control over CFC? If that's true, and he is the one who's been making the more sensible choices, I'm all for it. Like bluetrooper, and like every other supporter, I just want a period of calmness and stability at this football club so that we can focus on getting back to where we should be.
September 8, 20241 yr Graham Potter was hired 2 years ago today. TWO YEARS. What on earth, it’s been a really, really long two years.
September 8, 20241 yr Feels like we must be nearly at the decade where this ownership can sell up, right? It's been about 10 years?
September 8, 20241 yr 18 minutes ago, dansubrosa said: Graham Potter was hired 2 years ago today. TWO YEARS. What on earth, it’s been a really, really long two years. Wow it has. Feels like that was at least 5 years ago. I remember thinking he would do so well for us.
September 8, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, Zeta said: Feels like we must be nearly at the decade where this ownership can sell up, right? It's been about 10 years?
September 8, 20241 yr I thought part of the deal of buying CFC and writing off the debt was that they developed or upgraded the stadium, this has not happened to date. I would take the most notice of the bloomberg article alleging that other markets are growing and they see the EPL's market share getting smaller. If that is so then the investment boys would look to move and then Boehly might look for other partners.
September 8, 20241 yr 1 hour ago, strider6004 said: I thought part of the deal of buying CFC and writing off the debt was that they developed or upgraded the stadium, this has not happened to date. I would take the most notice of the bloomberg article alleging that other markets are growing and they see the EPL's market share getting smaller. If that is so then the investment boys would look to move and then Boehly might look for other partners. The conditions of purchase included spending minimum £1bn on the stadium, academy and women's teams. Conditions applied to all bidders and there was no timeframe.
September 8, 20241 yr Billy Hunts the lot of them, who really knows what’s going on unless you’re on The Board, it’s all speculation which unfortunately fuels media headlines. All we can hope for is it gets sorted sooner than later as it will, like all negativity, indirectly impact how the team performs on the pitch. Football clubs need stability and consistency throughout the organization to build a trophy winning machine. Say what you like about how RA ran Chelsea but he got the most important part bang on - SUCCESS. This lot of erberts have brought only chaos and mediocrity. Give us back our club !
September 8, 20241 yr Side note. They must have sold enough of the three kits now to get a sponsorship and know a lot will buy again
September 8, 20241 yr 7 hours ago, AlienX said: Might be misreading this but some mates on Instagram have told me that Boehly wants to buy full control over CFC? If that's true, and he is the one who's been making the more sensible choices, I'm all for it. Like bluetrooper, and like every other supporter, I just want a period of calmness and stability at this football club so that we can focus on getting back to where we should be. They both want control. Regardless what the media want you to believe, Chelsea is a very good investment to keep and i aint surprised they would fight for it. They are already in the black financially even with the chaos of the last 3 years and they have enough assets in players to keep them there a while. The club just needs stability and the hope these kids can be a good squad in a couple of years to compete at the top level. They will still buy talent every season but hopefully not that many. Keep any good ones and flip the rest for profit. It took them a year or 2 and a few fk ups but I guess they feel that they are slowly learning and succeeding (profit made this summer). Even if its all true, then either side will have to come up with 2.5-3.5bil ish? That's already more than they initially bought the club for. And as it's mentioned in previous posts by others, multi billionaires wouldn't hesitate if they could. We really aren't in a bad place at all, regardless what most want us to believe. I just hope for the sake of the club whatever happens its at least amicable. Who needs TV dramas when you have chelsea football club!
September 8, 20241 yr 51 minutes ago, Richard P said: Side note. They must have sold enough of the three kits now to get a sponsorship and know a lot will buy again Another great business plan! 🤑 🤑🤑 Ggggrrrrr... My third kit hasn't arrived yet. Ordered a while back and I received 2 order delayed emails.
September 8, 20241 yr 48 minutes ago, Simplymo said: They both want control. Regardless what the media want you to believe, Chelsea is a very good investment to keep and i aint surprised they would fight for it. They are already in the black financially even with the chaos of the last 3 years and they have enough assets in players to keep them there a while. The club just needs stability and the hope these kids can be a good squad in a couple of years to compete at the top level. They will still buy talent every season but hopefully not that many. Keep any good ones and flip the rest for profit. It took them a year or 2 and a few fk ups but I guess they feel that they are slowly learning and succeeding (profit made this summer). Even if its all true, then either side will have to come up with 2.5-3.5bil ish? That's already more than they initially bought the club for. And as it's mentioned in previous posts by others, multi billionaires wouldn't hesitate if they could. We really aren't in a bad place at all, regardless what most want us to believe. I just hope for the sake of the club whatever happens its at least amicable. Who needs TV dramas when you have chelsea football club! I don't think the owners are in the black. Their Consortium that owns us ( BlueCo) are over £600m in debt and the owners raised £800m of debt to finance their spending on the club .
September 8, 20241 yr I heard from somewhere earlier that this could take a year or two to settle, and I thought it'd be wrapped up in a few weeks!
September 9, 20241 yr 3 hours ago, The Rising Sun said: I don't think the owners are in the black. Their Consortium that owns us ( BlueCo) are over £600m in debt and the owners raised £800m of debt to finance their spending on the club . Oh, sry, I meant with the transfer and wages saga. We spent 200+ million this window and made it back and some, if all the undisclosed payments were made public. Also reducing the wages by 20mil per year. Their plan of buying players, keeping the best* for the squad and flipping the ones we don't want is working-ish. *yes, I know. Lol 1) best* after getting rid of high earners. 2) best* after selling 1 or 2 homegrowns and trying to make right the fk ups they did the first year. I hope/think now that they are nearly done with cleaning the mess of the 1st year (apart from mudryk) that they will only flip homegrowns that aren't good enough for the first squad. While "sensibly" improving our subs that are mostly rubbish imo. Edited September 9, 20241 yr by Simplymo
September 9, 20241 yr 2 hours ago, Mod said: I heard from somewhere earlier that this could take a year or two to settle, and I thought it'd be wrapped up in a few weeks! 🤣 A year or 2 if lucky with one of them giving up then yeah, maybe. CFC is way too good an investment not to fight for it. Boehly brought clearlake in. I'm guessing he had to pitch it to them as they came in very late. So they probably weren't all that interested tbh, it's not their usual type of investment. But now they are adamant they won't sell and actually interested in buying the rest out. Same with Boehly too. He can see the value and I also stand by I really really think he wants to be a fan. Ahhhhhh. 😄 Regardless of all the crap in the media...its too good an investment to just leave it. So...who will cave in first. Who's willing to fight it longer. Who's got access to enough money to persuade the other to leave. If they try to buy boehly and Co out how much higher than the 1.5bil are they going to have to go? How much more than the 2.5bil that Boehly has to come up with to buy clearlake out? 🤷♂️ If they want to they can settle this in a month if one party steps down right now and sells their shares to the other. If they don't, then a few years isn't a bad answer. Lol
September 9, 20241 yr I see it as Clearlake making sure they get top dollar for their stake. By being seen to put up a fight they’ll make sure the price for their stake will be high. Todd will then get money and partners from the Middle East to pay that price. Two years down the line it will happen again
September 9, 20241 yr Worth remembering this lot passed the "fit and proper owners tests" by the PL. Or was it the UK Gov told the PL they are fine? 3 hours ago, Mod said: I heard from somewhere earlier that this could take a year or two to settle, and I thought it'd be wrapped up in a few weeks! Well I still expect at least 8 years of this lot. After that hopefully we have a football club again.
September 9, 20241 yr Entirely predictable as we are seeing the effect of being owned by a consortium vs a single owner. Too many cooks inevitably spoil the broth. And in fairness, this was likely whether it was the American or British-led consortium too. Both consortiums seemed a coalition of the unwilling who were more tempted by the promise of riches than footballing strategy. Eghbali's comments about transfer arbitrage sealed it for me, it has seemed that Boehly and Clearlake have been at cross-purposes for some time now and the club is going to be saddled with the fallout. The fact that the board sacked Tuchel for his disinterest in strategic matters, only to apparently sack Pochettino and appoint Maresca for the opposite reason, was the biggest red flag. The media said that Boehly's work with the Dodgers showed that he was all about establishing a winning "brand", so most of us were utterly confused at the most recent transfer strategy summed up as "buy high, (maybe) sell higher". It certainly seems that decisions have been made by a multitude of people with no coherent goal or strategy. I think a number of people might feel vindicated having pointed out that the two approaches are mutually exclusive - you can either be a profitable winning club, or a profitable transfer-based club, but it is exceedingly hard to do both. This isn't necessarily a bad thing if we can have a single owner with a clear strategy. I don't think the actual 'winner' of this boardroom battle actually matters, because both could be viable strategies for the club's success going forward. I don't think it should really be a matter for fans to take a side. However, boardroom chaos always casts a cloud on the football and it is Maresca and the players who may pay the the price in the end. What will be interesting in the short term is seeing the divide in the media. It is clear as day that certain "journalists" are getting their information from Boehly's camp, and others from Clearlake/Eghbali. Edited September 9, 20241 yr by SydneyChelsea
September 9, 20241 yr 8 hours ago, Mod said: I heard from somewhere earlier that this could take a year or two to settle, and I thought it'd be wrapped up in a few weeks! The Arsenal power struggle between Usmanov and Kroenke took a decade to resolve. Buckle up ... 🙂
September 9, 20241 yr Obviously, we'd rather have an owner who is focused on the actual team and sport and not on returning a profit. Boehly is far from perfect but he's a far better option than Clearlake.
September 9, 20241 yr 9 hours ago, Simplymo said: Oh, sry, I meant with the transfer and wages saga. We spent 200+ million this window and made it back and some, if all the undisclosed payments were made public. Also reducing the wages by 20mil per year. Their plan of buying players, keeping the best* for the squad and flipping the ones we don't want is working-ish. *yes, I know. Lol 1) best* after getting rid of high earners. 2) best* after selling 1 or 2 homegrowns and trying to make right the fk ups they did the first year. I hope/think now that they are nearly done with cleaning the mess of the 1st year (apart from mudryk) that they will only flip homegrowns that aren't good enough for the first squad. While "sensibly" improving our subs that are mostly rubbish imo. broke even on transfers this summer. About -£700m in net spend from previous transfer windows. Wage bill reduced by £20m but missing out on £40m a year not being in the CL. Lost revenue from no shirt sponsor (again). Yeah ain't no way this is even close to profitable for the owners yet
September 9, 20241 yr Clearlake and Boehly are in tatters. Boehly’s approach is to hire experts and let them get on with it, while Clearlake, particularly Egbhali, has taken a role considered by boehly as “micromanaging” - a source close to Boehly’s side described Eghbali as being “obsessed with player trading! (@TheAthleticFC) #CFC Expect some hustle and leaks from different perspectives but interesting comment.
September 9, 20241 yr Figures familiar with the talks claim multiple parties have approached Boehly indicating they are willing to take on Chelsea with him: long-term investors, not people who expect short-term returns, ideal candidates seen as passive financial backers who can provide perpetual capital. (@TheAthleticFC) nytimes.com/athletic/57530…
Create an account or sign in to comment