23 minutes ago, Mod said:

The consortium thing puts me off a bit, too many cooks and all that.

But at this point I don’t we can be too fussy.

Massively depends how the basic structure works in terms of how decisions are arrived at.

Nick Candy has no chance IMO.  Trying far too hard, and with 5 days to go still doesnt have a single backer/investor.  I'm pretty confident he is out.  In fact I'm hoping he doesnt get the gig

Ken Bates is spot on with everything he said there.

Those praising the government when they are neck deep in corruption themselves and are punishing our club, putting people out of work and punishing our fans to turn the heat somewhere else.

They would not dare have done this had Roman owned Liverpool.

3 hours ago, Upsetter said:

Cuddly Ken in the Daily Fail (copied from another site, in case you’re wondering)

'The fact that you can't buy a match programme must mean that Putin is s****** himself': Former Chelsea owner Ken Bates slams sanctions imposed on the club as he claims 'it is the ordinary people who are suffering'

Ken Bates has never been one to mince words and the former Chelsea owner is forthright in his condemnation of the Government sanctions imposed on the club.

While the outspoken former football executive agrees with the decision to freeze the most famous of Roman Abramovichs assets, Bates is furious that Chelsea fans and staff have been forced to suffer too, with tickets sales frozen, club facilities shut and jobs said to be at risk.

He cannot fathom what meaningful impact such measures could exert on Vladimir Putin and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The fact that you cant buy a Chelsea match programme must mean that Putin is s*****g himself and all the ordinary people of Moscow are hiding in their cellars because they cant see a Chelsea match on TV, Bates said, speaking from his home in Monte Carlo.

As usual it is the ordinary people who are suffering. Youve probably got people working at Chelsea saying do they have a job? What is their future? Do they have security? And fans at Chelsea. What have they got to do with Putin bombing maternity hospitals in Ukraine?

Instead weve got all these regulations, which just get some good headlines. "England takes firm action against Russia." If we are trying to help Ukraine we should be doing things that are meaningful.

Bates famously bought Chelsea for a £1 in 1982 before selling to Abramovich 19 years later in a deal reported to be worth around £140million.

Instead weve got all these regulations, which just get some good headlines. "England takes firm action against Russia." If we are trying to help Ukraine we should be doing things that are meaningful.

Bates famously bought Chelsea for a £1 in 1982 before selling to Abramovich 19 years later in a deal reported to be worth around £140million.

Abramovich had grown rich after acquiring state-owned assets following the break-up of the Soviet Union and was close to Putin, then serving his first term as president, but the source of his wealth was scarcely investigated in the UK at the time.

Selling it to a Russian was the same as selling to anybody else, Bates says. It was no different in those days. The dealings I had with him were always straightforward and simple.

What is his response to the oligarchs asset-freeze? I dont feel sympathy for him. Why should I? Hes worth £7-8billion. But he can only eat steak and chips twice a day, same as me. When he goes to his grave, his shroud wont have any pockets in it.

The Government has said it will allow the club to be sold despite the sanctions on Abramovich. Potential bidders who want to expand Stamford Bridge will run into the same problem that the current owner has faced.

The brainchild of Bates during his time in charge, the Chelsea Pitch Owners group own the leasehold to Stamford Bridge and the club name, giving them the power of veto on any proposed venue move.

Bates is proud that he empowered the fans with an idea inspired by an enterprising Irishman he had heard about. The Irish are all over the world and they get sentimental about the "old sod". This guy bought four acres of land north of Dublin. Sold it off in square foot pieces. 100 quid each or whatever. Then he went around the world, saying have a piece of the old sod.

I thought what a bloody clever idea. Ill do the same with Chelsea. But the lawyer rang me up and said Ken if you do that youre trading in land. Youll probably get charged VAT. And youve got to pay registration.

So then I came up with the idea of forming a company, the Chelsea pitch owners. I gave them a 999-year lease on the pitch. And I made a rule no matter how many shares you own you only have one vote.

I also gave them the name Chelsea Football Club and I said you can only use that name if you play at Stamford Bridge. So the fans own the name and the pitch. Stamford Bridge is probably the most valuable piece of land in London. But it belongs to the club. Thats my legacy. 
 

With no apologies for not providing a link to that f**king rag.

Good old Uncle Ken. 

1 minute ago, axman2526 said:

Ken Bates is spot on with everything he said there.

Those praising the government when they are neck deep in corruption themselves and are punishing our club, putting people out of work and punishing our fans to turn the heat somewhere else.

They would not dare have done this had Roman owned Liverpool.

I don't buy it.

I mean I have no doubt they'll do what you say if it suits them but that's where it falls down for me. It's not in their interest to have the biggest club in London (which we are now no matter how many times Arsenal fans cry about how good they were when they were in nappies) dive down the pyramid and if there's one thing this government can be firmly trusted on is they will act in their best interest.

18 minutes ago, Argo said:

I don't buy it.

I mean I have no doubt they'll do what you say if it suits them but that's where it falls down for me. It's not in their interest to have the biggest club in London (which we are now no matter how many times Arsenal fans cry about how good they were when they were in nappies) dive down the pyramid and if there's one thing this government can be firmly trusted on is they will act in their best interest.

Not to mention, we probably have more Chelsea fans on the Tory donor list than any other club 

It’s always great when we win. And today was,to me anyway, ‘an extra special win’ because of everything that’s currently going on.

’Blue is the colour.’

Petr doesn't sound too confident here...

Perhaps that's why Tuchel celebrated like a mad-man today as we'll need a 9 point gap to fifth if we go into administration here.

 

So we basically need a new owner. If we get an owner everything goes back to normal, new normal for sure but I feel this is blown out of proportion. Why wouldn't we get a new owner. We are one of the top clubs in the world.

The Candy man can

And despite all the sh*t thrown at us, we still win. Blue is the colour, Chelsea is the name.

34 minutes ago, evissy said:

So we basically need a new owner. If we get an owner everything goes back to normal, new normal for sure but I feel this is blown out of proportion. Why wouldn't we get a new owner. We are one of the top clubs in the world.

I don't think finding a new owner is the biggest issue, its the time to get it all done that is the biggest worry. The ownership of anything doesn't just change overnight, there are so many things to go over before things can be finalised. 

The Premier League themselves have to approve it too, and you only have to look at Newcastle to see how long this can take. Remember, the Saudi takeover was originally rejected by the Premier League's fit and proper test. 

Edited March 13, 20224 yr by Scott Harris

7 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

I don't think finding a new owner is the biggest issue, its the time to get it all done that is the biggest worry. The ownership of anything doesn't just change overnight, there are so many things to go over before things can be finalised. 

The Premier League themselves have to approve it too, and you only have to look at Newcastle to see how long this can take. Remember, the Saudi takeover was originally rejected by the Premier League's fit and proper test. 

I assume it took a lot longer for Newcastle because of the Saudi owners.

If this drags on in this case I don't see how we escape administration. So I really hope this can all be fast-tracked through in this case. At this point i'd take the Boehly-Wyss consortium in a heartbeat tbh. 

6 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

 

The Premier League themselves have to approve it too, and you only have to look at Newcastle to see how long this can take.

I don't think you compare the two sales, any deal involving Mike Ashley will be prolonged, Roman has been basically forced to give the club away.

Adrian Durham has said a lot of things I disagree with over the years on TalkSport, but I think most of what he says here is very well said.

 

Hopefully something is done soon. The longer it takes the bleaker it will be. 

We can't risk the players walking away free, having seen it first hand at Rangers don't take what the players say regarding staying and taking cuts. As soon as a window appears they will go to the best paying club in a heartbeat. 

Okay, takeovers can take time but I don't think anything irreversible is let happen to our club. We all know it is only to hurt Roman. It is already done. Roman is basically out and can't benefit of Chelsea FC. He is the owner on paper but hardly in any other way. The government already said they won't let this hurt the club as it is seen part of culture/bigger picture. Chelsea is more meaningful being a massive club like it is. If we are relegated/go to admission our status as a cultural entity is far from being the same. 

Let the sale happen, make it so things can roll on. Roman is out which is the thing they wanted to happen to put pressure on Putin. There is nothing more they can do to Roman to put more pressure anymore. It has already happened. 

Anything else happens to us is massively unfair. I don't think people would digest it, even football fans that are not Chelsea.

Edited March 13, 20224 yr by evissy

Matt Law gave an interesting update. Said bids need to be in by Friday and then the preferred bid will be notified next week with a few to completing 4-6 weeks. I imagine past Friday once the bidding process has closed, things will move quickly. 
 

I also expect the govt to relax some of the rules now that Roman is “selling”. 
 

We’ve got 3 weeks until we play the next home game on 2nd April. I expect by then, things will be a lot clearer and easier. 

3 hours ago, Scott Harris said:

I don't think finding a new owner is the biggest issue, its the time to get it all done that is the biggest worry. The ownership of anything doesn't just change overnight, there are so many things to go over before things can be finalised. 

The Premier League themselves have to approve it too, and you only have to look at Newcastle to see how long this can take. Remember, the Saudi takeover was originally rejected by the Premier League's fit and proper test. 

Premier League chief executive said the fastest they have completed a take over is 9 days, but they think they could do it quicker. I think this time next week, we will know the preferred bidder, then in the 2 week international break they will try get it pushed through. 

I dont think the government are purposely trying to bury us, gove is a season ticket holder, and raab is a chelsea fan too. We are in uncharted territory, and this try mob have used us to shift the focus away from the refugee crisis, and yo make it look like they are doing there bit to help the situation in Ukraine. 

There is no way they want this limbo to drag out, and they are constantly working with the board to make amendments to the licence to minimize damage in the interim. 

 

7 minutes ago, big blue said:

, gove is a season ticket holder

Gove is QPR.

1 minute ago, bluehaze said:

Gove is QPR.

My mistake, kinda glad he isnt chelsea though.😂

I saw on the BBC webpage that Pay Nevin thinks the league cup final might be the last major cup final he'll ever see Chelsea in again, do any of you really think that?  For that to happen it'll mean that Reece, Mount, Havertz et al have all been sold off...!!! I just don't see that... If we are forced to sell some players to fill a sponsor black hole, sell Lukaku and Kepa.  Bring in Broja and sign some other back up keeper, I just don't see this scenario where the entire first team has gone and we're left playing the loan army as our first team!!!

Yeah I don’t get what Nevin was saying, once we get a new owner I don’t see things being massively different to how they have been. Of course the new owners might be a little more careful with spending but nobody is spending £2bn-£3bn to take a massive club like Chelsea backwards.

12 minutes ago, Chris Gundleton said:

I saw on the BBC webpage that Pay Nevin thinks the league cup final might be the last major cup final he'll ever see Chelsea in again, do any of you really think that?  

Is he terminally ill with weeks left to live ? 

Can Roman still absorb the debt, or is that now valid under sanctions?, that’s what I’m interpreting, if so we are f**ked…