All Activity

💥🔵Liverpool have joined the race for Jan Paul van Hecke. (Voetbal International)

Not surprising. Bluecon only care about bleeding the club dry it seems

Unless we decide to make a loss on him, there's no chance Bayern will be signing him permanently or any top club for that matter.

Ohhh we're currently 10th..

Inside Liam Rosenior’s 107 days at Chelsea: Squad splits, a strange admission and BlueCo regrets https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7221654/2026/04/23/liam-rosenior-sack-Chelsea-why/ Tensions were running high between sections of the Chelsea dressing room by the time the club chose to sack head coach Liam Rosenior. Chelsea felt they had no choice but to act on Wednesday, less than 24 hours after a dismal 3-0 defeat at Brighton & Hove Albion. A run of seven defeats in eight games was bad enough, but the manner of the performances showed there was little sign of the 41-year-old being able to turn things around. Rosenior’s reign lasted just 107 days, the shortest tenure of any coach appointed since the Todd Boehly-Clearlake consortium bought the club in May 2022. The former Fulham and Hull City defender was appointed on January 6, just five days after Enzo Maresca left Stamford Bridge. Rosenior was well known and well liked among all the Chelsea hierarchy right up until his departure. He had already impressed them over the previous 18 months as head coach of Strasbourg, who are owned by the same parent company, BlueCo. Chelsea sack Liam Rosenior How Rosenior’s muddled tactics left Chelsea a bedraggled mess Rosenior never commanded authority at Chelsea. He was doomed from the start Why Champions League football is essential to BlueCo’s model Four key reasons Rosenior’s position became untenable Chelsea’s unaccountable executives have built a monument to hubris However, multiple sources — who, like everyone contacted for this article by The Athletic, spoke anonymously to protect relationships — reveal Rosenior faced a difficult task from the outset because of the impact of Maresca’s departure, with many players privately questioning his methods. By the end, he had few supporters in the squad. One source close to a senior player said that the English contingent in the dressing room stayed supportive the longest, but even they ultimately recognised that Rosenior probably was not the right man for the job. This is the story of why his tenure was cut short so early. Chelsea never intended to change head coach mid-season, but, as one senior club source puts it, Maresca’s departure was a case of him “walking out” rather than the club choosing to get rid of him. At the time, the Chelsea statement announcing his exit simply said the club and the Italian had “parted company”. subsequently revealed Maresca had informed Chelsea that he was talking to Manchester City about the possibility of succeeding Pep Guardiola if and when a vacancy arose. Maresca also informed the club of interest from Juventus but people with knowledge of the Italian giants’ position at the time, speaking anonymously to protect relationships, said that they were happy with manager Luciano Spalletti. In January, sources close to Maresca insisted he made it clear that he’d had no intention of leaving and would have been happy to renew his Chelsea contract but no talks took place, with the former Leicester City boss in the second season of a minimum five-year deal. Maresca’s departure was a seismic blow to those players who had loved playing for him, particularly the club’s Spanish-speaking contingent. One source close to a senior squad member revealed how the player had formed a particularly close bond with Maresca, clearly helped by being able to speak the same language (Maresca had played for Sevilla and Malaga earlier in his career). Maresca was regularly seen hugging and joking with them, but was not the same with others. Even though Maresca had won just one of his last seven league games before leaving Chelsea, qualifying for the Champions League the season before, plus winning the UEFA Conference League and FIFA Club World Cup, was regarded as evidence of making major progress by his supporters in the squad. Both Enzo Fernandez and Marc Cucurella, two of Chelsea’s most senior players, publicly questioned why the club allowed Maresca to leave in interviews last month. Speaking exclusively to The Athletic, Cucurella talked about how Chelsea were “more stable” under Maresca, and that his departure “had a big impact” and caused “instability”. Meanwhile, Fernandez told Mexican broadcaster TUDN that he did not understand why Chelsea had let Maresca go, that it “hurt us a lot” because he had given the team “an identity”. Marc Cucurella (second from left) was upset to see Enzo Maresca leaveAlberto Pizzoli/AFP via Getty Images They were not the only players who were sorry to see Maresca go, but sources have told The Athletic there were others in the camp who were not quite as devastated. Differences of opinion like this are not unusual at any football club, let alone Chelsea, but they all combined to create a major challenge for Rosenior when he took over. He made a good start, winning eight of his first 11 matches. But while even the sceptics in the squad conceded that Rosenior was a “nice guy”, multiple sources say there were reservations from a very early stage about the way he communicated. This was true even before his publicly ridiculed comments about “respecting the ball”, an explanation for Chelsea’s pre-match huddle over the centre circle. This was a ritual used for several weeks during his tenure until an embarrassing incident involving referee Paul Tierney in March sparked a rethink. While Rosenior had supported the tactic, it was actually an idea brought in by the players and player support and development officer Willie Isa. When Rosenior arrived, there was an intense fixture schedule, meaning there was little time to work on things. Alarmingly, the downturn, which saw Chelsea lose five successive league games without scoring a goal for the first time since 1912, coincided with Rosenior getting more days with the players to put his ideas across. One source close to a senior player said training sessions were not as good as those provided by another former coach, Mauricio Pochettino, as well as Maresca. What You Should Read Next Chelsea’s unaccountable executives have built a monument to hubris Liam Rosenior's failure was not his fault. It was another massive mis-step by an ownership that is blundering far too often Another explained how the players were struggling to get a grip of what he wanted or understood what he was trying to do, while another said that, unlike Maresca, Rosenior was more of a motivator than a tactician or a manager. But the consensus on Rosenior’s training methods was not universal. Another source close to a senior player admitted that the level of sessions had dropped noticeably since the Maresca era, but attributed this change to players simply not bringing the same level of intensity as before. Not everyone was against him or looked down on everything he tried. One source close to the camp revealed how Rosenior’s decision to meet with the most senior players early on to try to get them on board was both smart and appreciated. Rosenior also spoke about giving the younger players a fresh chance and summer signing Jorrel Hato was one who particularly benefited, having been given few opportunities by Maresca. Striker Joao Pedro, who was already a regular under Maresca, scored 12 of his 19 goals this season under Rosenior. Chelsea club sources speak glowingly about the way Rosenior operated, insisting he conducted himself with real professionalism during his time there. They say Rosenior built strong relationships with players and staff and that the decision was not due to any breakdown in relationships, but simply because of the form the team was in. When Chelsea scored their last league goals in a 4-1 win at Aston Villa on March 4, things still looked good on the surface. They were fifth in the Premier League, just three points behind Manchester United in third. Three days later, Chelsea booked a place in the FA Cup quarter-finals with victory at Wrexham, and after 74 minutes of the Champions League last-16 first leg at Paris Saint-Germain on March 11, the team were well placed to cause a major upset and reach the quarter-finals. Rosenior’s side were drawing 2-2, only for a late collapse to see them beaten 5-2 on the night, and ultimately 8-2 on aggregate. It was a humbling loss that prefaced Chelsea’s Premier League tailspin. Rosenior’s efforts to engineer a turnaround were undermined by team news leaks several hours before kick-off on three occasions — ahead of both Champions League matches against PSG, plus Brighton. In the latter, a message on X purportedly posted by Cucurella’s barber (and which was subsequently deleted) revealed Joao Pedro and Cole Palmer would not be involved. It proved accurate. Sources close to the players insist the spirit in the group has slumped. While it is normal for opinions on coaches to vary within a dressing room, it has been an increasing source of angst. Some players were overheard complaining recently that Rosenior was not giving them enough days off. Sources have revealed that one senior player was unimpressed with what he heard and reminded them that the team was on a losing run and this was not the time to be complaining about such things. More than one source said the number of players who expressed doubt or dissatisfaction to each other with Rosenior grew over time, and interpreted this trend as jumping on the bandwagon in order to avoid confronting their own poor performances. Issues have emerged between players who have stood by club decisions and those who have questioned them. As one source close to a senior player puts it: “There are groups in the dressing room that are very pragmatic and just want to see the club do well, and others who have their own agenda. Some are still upset about Maresca going and believe everyone should be that way. Others believe what’s done is done, everyone should move on, and the most important thing is Chelsea.” Fernandez, who implied in more than one interview during the March international break that he was interested in a move to Real Madrid, was banned by Chelsea for two games, a decision taken by Rosenior and the club. But the effect was to place Chelsea and Rosenior under more scrutiny, especially as Fernandez sat out a bad 3-0 defeat at home to Manchester City. Enzo Fernandez hinted at wanting to leave Chelsea in MarchJulian Finney/Getty Images For a long period, Chelsea were keen to stick by Rosenior. Chelsea sources point out that Maresca had the benefit of introducing his tactics during pre-season in 2024. They won just one of their six friendlies, but he had the time to work on things without too much pressure, whereas Rosenior was plunged straight into a frenetic period of the season. Some within the club believe last summer’s FIFA Club World Cup exertions are taking a physical toll on the squad, and injuries have mounted in recent weeks. The intention until very recently was to give Rosenior a pre-season and review things at the end of the 2026-27 campaign at the earliest. The club’s confidence in Rosenior stemmed partly from him having worked within BlueCo since July 2024, when he was appointed at Strasbourg. Chelsea sources talked of Rosenior having had the longest job interview of any of their head coaches before his appointment at Stamford Bridge, and the sporting leadership were impressed by his work at Strasbourg, where his tactics, training and player communication were all regarded as strengths. What You Should Read Next The BookKeeper: Exploring BlueCo’s finances and its massive bet on Chelsea Investigating the extraordinary finances behind the ownership of Chelsea and what needs to happen for the gamble to pay off Rosenior appreciated this backing, speaking ahead of the Brighton fixture of feeling supported 100 per cent. He mentioned many times how he was involved in transfer plans for the summer. Co-owner Behdad Eghbali took the rare step to speak publicly at the CAA’s World Congress of Sports conference in Los Angeles last week, and also provided backing. “We think he has every attribute to be successful here,” he said. “He got off to a great start. We’ve had a tough past five, six matches, but I think we’re behind Liam. Of course, it’s a results business, but we think he can be successful long-term.” What You Should Read Next Liam Rosenior never commanded authority at Chelsea. He was doomed from the start A lack of serious coaching or playing credentials meant the head coach was never likely to ride out the Stamford Bridge storm A few days later, Chelsea lost 1-0 at home to Manchester United, a damaging result in the club’s pursuit of Champions League qualification. While Rosenior spoke about the display being much better, sources say it was not a view shared by everyone at the club. Match-going fans increasingly turned on Rosenior, which culminated in chants of “F**k off Rosenior” during his final game in charge. Sources connected to senior players say they felt the writing was on the wall when Rosenior admitted to them in a team meeting earlier this week that he was feeling extremely vulnerable. While it was thought he was not necessarily referring specifically to his job prospects, it was still perceived as a strange admission. The hierarchy met on Wednesday morning to discuss options and it was decided they had to make a change to try to end the season on a high. Qualifying for the Champions League is unlikely, but they can still get into the Europa League via the Premier League and/or by winning the FA Cup for the first time since 2018. Former under-21s coach Calum McFarlane, who was interim for two games after Maresca’s departure and subsequently promoted to Rosenior’s backroom staff, has been chosen to take the helm for the short term once again. Calum McFarlane will take charge of Chelsea until the end of the seasonShaun Botterill/Getty Images He was on the phone call arranged by Chelsea’s sporting leadership with the squad’s leadership group to communicate the plan for the coaching change on Wednesday. Sources close to players say he is well-liked and rated as a coach. Just like in January, former defender John Terry was not considered for a role, a cause of frustration for the club’s former captain. Chelsea will take their time to choose their next permanent head coach. Andoni Iraola, who is leaving Bournemouth at the end of this campaign, is one of seven or eight names under consideration. Chelsea insist no talks with candidates or representatives had taken place before Rosenior’s departure, but that process is now likely to be accelerated. Former Chelsea midfielder Cesc Fabregas would be an appealing option but is committed to his current job at Como, where he has excelled. Chelsea’s first priority is to unite and try to beat Leeds United at Wembley on Sunday. Club sources insist the relationship between the hierarchy and the players is strong, underlined by the recent decisions of club captain Reece James and Moises Caicedo to sign new long-term contracts. But easing the doubts over the direction the club is heading will be harder to fix. As one source close to a senior player said: “They had to sack Rosenior, but it is hard to see how this team progresses to something bigger with how things are being handled.”

Why Chelsea could fall out of the Big Six Welcome to The Athletic FC's YouTube channel, where best-in-class journalism meets video. Premier League, Champions League, Club World Cup... Chelsea have won them all in recent history and established themselves as part of the 'Big Six'. But now they're not even in the top 6 of the Premier League... Are Chelsea about to surrender their status as a Big Six club? Ayo Akinwolere is joined by Alex Barker, JJ Bull and Liam Twomey to find out. This is The Athletic's Week In Football. Timestamps: 00:00 Why Chelsea could fall out of the Big Six 00:22 What’s happening at Stamford Bridge? 02:27 What’s happening at the executive level? 04:13 The impact of missing out on the Champions League again 06:45 How will this affect Chelsea’s transfer strategy? 12:19 Muddled transfers, muddled tactics 18:30 Chelsea’s managerial search 19:56 Would Andoni Iraola make sense at Chelsea? 22:15 What kind of manager suits Chelsea? 28:56 Are Chelsea falling out of the Big Six? Read The Athletic's feature on Liam Rosenior's 107-day tenure: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7221654/2026/04/23/liam-rosenior-sack-Chelsea-why/

How Chelsea Set Up Under Cesc Fabregas Connor Holden Football examines how Cesc Fàbregas integrates positional buildup, structured rest defense, and zone replacement to control matches at Como. The analysis explores how these specific tactical principles regarding ball possession, aggressive counter-pressing, and player fluidity could potentially be adapted to fit Chelsea's current squad composition and future development.

How Chelsea Set Up Under Andoni Iraola Connor Holden Football examines Andoni Iraola's tactical principles, focusing on high-intensity buildup play, triangular rotations, and aggressive pressing structures. The analysis explores how these strategic concepts could be adapted to Chelsea's current squad composition, potential player roles, and the tactical adjustments necessary for implementing this style of play.

How Chelsea Set Up Under Xabi Alonso Connor Holden Football examines the core tactical principles of Xabi Alonso, focusing on building up play and counter-pressing structures. By analyzing specific player profiles and positional flexibility, the breakdown explores how these strategic concepts could potentially be implemented within the current Chelsea squad to achieve greater control and technical synergy.

all it takes to truly see the danger we are in is a few days worth of deep dives via the videos and articles many of us have posted here in the past few months to years, and especially lately also it helps to have basic financial knowledge in regards to these giant hedge fund hyenas, these global banksters, and these private equity vultures especially the American types as that is who we are mostly dealing with

Analysis of selling or keeping the one CB we now have who I am really on the fence about Trevoh He is currently the 27th most valued CB out of all CBs according to T-Markt and the 15th most valued right-footed CB according to T-Markt he turns 27yo in July, so has 5 or 6 peak years left so he will likely never be worth more that this summer or January 2027 he also is HG (helps his EPL dale value) he is NOT of such quality that he is a nailed-on starter for an EPL or CL winning-level club and his sale (let's say we get £40m for him, which for me is a far price) is pure profit, and we desperately need to sell players I say SELL, but ONLY if we replace him with an actually better right-footed CB my list of those who are even remotely available: Luka Vuskovic is my DREAM right-footed CB signing (along with the lefty Bastoni), BUT both are basically impossible to pull for us 😕 Cristian Romero pass, he is a git Ousmane Diomande Jarell Quansah Malick Thiaw Yann Bisseck Maxence Lacroix Jan Paul van Hecke Joel Ordóñez (my number one realistic choice) António Silva Tomás Araújo Jacobo Ramón BUT Real Madrid have a buy-back clause they will so so use in the next 2 years, so, like Vuskovic, a pipe dream Noahkai Banks (turns 20yo in December 2026, and has massive promise)

Wow this is glazer on steroids. Definitely these type of entities should not be allowed in sports.

See the middle of the article especially for some vital information in terms of termination versus sale or wait the ban out (I highlighted it) Why was Mudryk given ban in secret and what happens now? https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cqxpry93zv1o Daniel Austin, BBC Sport senior journalist and Nizaar Kinsella, Football reporter Published 1 May 2026 When news broke that Chelsea winger Mykhailo Mudryk has begun an appeal against a four-year doping ban, many football fans immediately asked, what ban? That is because the Football Association, who issued the ban to the Ukraine international because of an "adverse finding in a routine urine test", never announced its decision or any details of the punishment in public. The news only became common knowledge on Wednesday because the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) announced Mudryk had taken the decision to appeal against the ban. So why has the process been kept secret and what happens now? When was Mudryk banned and why the secrecy? BBC Sport has been told Mudryk was banned by the FA in January but that only a close-knit group of people around him and a small number of people at Chelsea were informed. That is because the FA's anti-doping programme is deemed strictly confidential - all parts of the process, from testing to discussions with lawyers, are carried out behind closed doors in order to respect the privacy of footballers. UK Anti-Doping (Ukad) works in collaboration with the FA on the programme. In many other sports, provisional bans for positive tests are announced publicly. In its privacy policy for anti-doping, the FA says: "We will process sensitive personal data in carrying out processing. We do this for the purposes of eliminating doping in sport and protecting the integrity of the game. "Data may be shared with a number of third parties. As well as sharing data with Ukad, information may be shared with the police where there is evidence of criminal conduct, with Uefa and Fifa and any other relevant event organisers and international federations with doping responsibility, as well as the World Anti-Doping Agency. "Information about testing and outcomes may also be shared with your club." Cases often only become public knowledge when a player has been absent from their team's playing squad for a period of time without proper explanation. Outcomes and punishments are usually officially made public once the process has concluded but this may be delayed until any appeals have also been exhausted. Image source,Getty Images Image caption, Mudryk scored 10 goals in 73 appearances for Chelsea between his arrival from Shaktar Donetsk and his suspension What was Mudryk charged with? The exact prohibited substance for which Mudryk tested positive has never been named by the FA, but BBC Sport understands it is the cardiovascular medication meldonium, which has the potential to increase respiratory capacity and stamina, which he came into contact with while on duty with the Ukraine national team. Last year, a spokesperson for the Ukranian FA (UAF) told BBC Sport none of its staff were involved in the case. "UAF officials cannot comment on this matter since the UAF is not a part of this case," it told BBC Sport. "The World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) or the English FA didn't send any request to the UAF. "We are in close contact with Mudryk's lawyers and provide them with all necessary information. We cannot comment further as a non-disclosure provision is in effect." It remains unclear how exactly Mudryk apparently ingested meldonium, which has been banned by Wada since 2016 and is primarily used in Eastern European countries to treat conditions such as angina, heart failure and coronary artery disease. Tests at the 2015 European Games in Baku found that 13 medallists were taking the substance at the time and that its use occurred in the majority of the sports included in the tournament. Wimbledon champion Maria Sharapova failed a drugs test in March 2016 after meldonium was detected in her sample. Is Mudryk still a Chelsea player and when can he return? Mudryk has been suspended and unable to play for either Chelsea or Ukraine since the FA provisionally suspended him 16 months ago. He remains contracted to the Blues until 2031, having signed a long deal when he joined for £61m in 2022, as part of the club's plan to amortise the cost of transfers and contracts. Amortisation means spreading costs out over many years in order to reduce them in each year of a business' accounts. If Mudryk's ban is upheld by Cas, he would be unable to play again until roughly December 2028, as that is four years since his provisional suspension began. But if the ban were to be reduced by Cas, he could be back on the pitch in a much shorter timeframe. Sources close to the player believe he could be back in action as early as next season. Chelsea would be able to terminate Mudryk's contract once the Cas process has concluded, given an anti-doping ban constitutes a breach of employment terms in most footballers' contracts. Were they to do that, the amortised cost of the remaining years of Mudryk's contract would disappear from the club accounts - effectively writing the expense off and helping their finances significantly. On the other hand though, Chelsea would be entitled to sell Mudryk for some sort of transfer fee if they maintain his contract and keep paying his wages. Or they could of course continue to pay his wages as a member of their squad and reintegrate him into the team once the ban has ended. Image source,Getty Images Image caption, Chelsea agreed performance-related add-ons with Mudryk's former club Shakhtar Donetsk when they signed him, which the Ukrainian club may now miss out on due to his extended absence What does Mudryk's ban stop him doing and where is he training? Mudryk last played for Chelsea on 28 November 2024 and was an unused substitute for a league match three days later against Aston Villa. He last made a public appearance after Chelsea's 4-1 Uefa Conference League final win over Real Betis, which he watched in a private capacity. The 25-year-old met supporters when out walking with friends in the Polish city of Wroclaw and attended Chelsea's celebration party at the team's hotel. Since then, Mudryk has remained in London though he is unable to play matches or even train alongside his team-mates. Chelsea are tracking his progress but the terms of his suspension mean he is extremely limited in the access he is allowed to the club, its facilities and his team-mates. The Ukrainian is training alone with a private coach at facilities including Uxbridge FC and has also hired goalkeepers for some sessions. A devout Orthodox Christian, he frequently attends church and those around him insist he is in good physical and mental health. Image source,Getty Images Image caption, Cas was established as part of the International Olympic Committee in 1984 What will Cas do now? Mudryk lodged his appeal to Cas on 25 February. Cas is based in Lausanne, Switzerland and is considered the international supreme court for sport, ruling on disputes as a neutral, independent body. The court will re-examine the case, typically with a panel of three arbitrators who go over the evidence and can either uphold, overturn, or modify the ban given out by the FA. The panel of arbitrators can call witnesses to give evidence, in person or via video link. The process is conducted in private, before the arbitrators take time to consider their verdict. In 2024, a four-year doping ban given to former Manchester United and Juventus midfielder Paul Pogba was reduced to 18 months after he appealed to Cas. Pogba was represented by Morgan Sports Law, who are also representing Mudryk. It was four months after Pogba lodged his appeal that a hearing was held and a further two months until a decision was announced.

Chelsea & Xabi Alonso AGREE on vision?! & Joao Pedro To Barcelona?! In today's Chelsea news, we discuss the return of Reece James and Levi Colwill ahead of Monday's game against Nottingham Forest. Trevor Chalobah is in talks to extend his Chelsea contract. Chelsea can rip up Mudryk's contract under one condition. Chelsea already in talks with Xabi Alonso?! Chelsea is set to sell at least 2 strikers this summer, and Barcelona wants Joao Pedro?! Timestamps: 00:00 - Intro 00:32 - Reece James and Levi Colwill RETURN! 05:08 - Trevor Chalobah EXTENDING Contract! 07:55 - Chelsea can rip up Mudryk's contract? 16:04 - Xabi Alonso & Chelsea AGREE on vision?! 22:36 - Chelsea to SELL 2 Strikers as Barca want Joao Pedro?!

sorry for the relentless Friday night doom postings on so many subjects (and none of these include our players in terms of buys and sales and quality of the squad, which of course is a HUGE part of us surviving and hopefully thriving, at least football-wise) but here we are these are all a very likely (the degrees of impact for each may vary of course) set of realities for us under the BlueCO cunt regime

also in terms of loss of revenue from now to that sell date almost exactly 6 years from now we will be missing around £1 billion or so (these are all really rough back of hand calcualtions of course) total in 3 specific types of revenue IF 3 bad things happen (one will happen for sure, one surely HAS to be sorted, and one is only fixed if we get the CL most every year, plus do decently in domestic cups and EPL final tables, and do well in the 2029 FIFA Club World Cup) 1. the loss of revenue for a new stadium versus the current SB (that is happening no matter what) 2. the loss of revenue from having either no or some partial year bollocks front of shirt main sponsor (this HAS to be sorted) 3. the loss of revenue from not having CL (and it is even worse if we do not get any euro footie) doing shit in the EPL tables, doing shit in domestic cups, and doing shit in the 2029 FCWC they are other losses of revenue that also come from having a shit side as well that I did not even get into (merch sales to name just one more, etc)

🗯🔵Benfica have shortlisted Fulham's Marco Silva as a leading candidate to replace José Mourinho, who has been linked with a return to Real Madrid next season. (@Record)

Ares has exploded (as I predicted) in AUM (assets under management) from when I started talking about them closing in on around 3 years ago and now have a massive $644.3 billion AUM as of the end of Q1 2026, up from $341 billion AUM at the end of Q3 2022 so they almost doubled their AUM in just the last 3 and a half years they are truly a monster financial firm, likely headed for over 1 trillion USD in AUM in the next several years Clearlake has, as of the end of Q1 2026, around $185 billion in AUM, and that is double what it was until their recent Q1 2026 acquisition of Pathway Finanacial so Ares is 3 and half times larger than Clearlake in terms of AUM, and were seven times larger (AUM-wise) pre Clearlake's Pathway acquisition

I don't think he'd go to Ajax, especially with possible PL offers or even La Liga opportunities.

Todd Boehly’s insurer wins reprieve on rules to close capital arbitrage Billionaire investor’s Security Benefit had been the heaviest user of a structure being targeted by US regulators https://www.ft.com/content/c448bbee-cc81-46f3-a784-41a982dd9eb5?syn-25a6b1a6=1 https://archive.ph/JhK18 Todd Boehly’s insurer has won a temporary reprieve from new rules that would have hit its capital reserves, as regulators tussle with private capital-backed players over how groups invest retirees’ savings. Security Benefit, a $60bn life insurer owned by the billionaire sports investor’s Eldridge Industries, has succeeded in delaying changes to capital rules despite a warning from one regulator that current regulations create a “capital arbitrage” that is being “actively exploited”. At issue are collateral loans, an investment structure that allows insurers to back promises to policyholders with debt secured by underlying assets. These range from mortgages to intellectual property rights, future cash flows and the riskiest slices of collateral loan obligations. Security Benefit has been by far the heaviest user of collateral loans in recent years. As of 2024, the most recent data available, the Kansas-based insurer alone held 47 per cent of the entire US life insurance sector’s collateral loans. Security Benefit had $12.9bn — more than a quarter of its total invested assets — in collateral loans in 2024. Todd Boehly owns 20% of the LA Dodgers, while his company Eldridge Industries separately holds a 7% stake © Shaun Brooks/CameraSport via Getty Images Under current rules, insurers can incur a flat 6.8 per cent capital charge on these investments. If they were owned outright, they would typically incur higher capital charges. “By simply papering the investment as a collateral loan”, Iowa’s insurance division warned in a recent note, insurers can cut the capital they are required to have against these investments by as much as two-thirds compared with holding the asset directly. The Iowa regulator, which oversees more insurance assets than any other state, said that collateral loans are “the most easily exploited asset class for capital arbitrage”. This arbitrage was “being actively exploited”, it added. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners, which develops the rules used by US states to regulate insurers, has set out plans to make it more expensive to rely on collateral loans backed by riskier exposures, such as equity investments. NAIC officials including Philip Barlow, who chairs a working group tasked with overseeing changes, had pushed for rule changes — which the body has been developing for more than two years — to go into effect by the end of this year. But after lobbying by Security Benefit, the rule change has been pushed back, handing a temporary reprieve to the insurer, which is seen as the primary target of the sector-wide rule changes. At the NAIC’s spring meetings, the working group Barlow chairs agreed to delay closing the loophole until next year, people familiar with the talks told the FT. Insurance regulatory officials from Kansas backed the insurer in its effort to delay changes, the people said. Security Benefit is based in the Kansas state capital Topeka, pictured. Officials from the state backed the insurer in its effort to delay changes © Dreamstime Unlike some other users of collateral loan structures, nearly all of Security Benefit’s collateral loans — about $12.8bn out of $12.9bn — were backed by affiliated assets. Recent filings, for example, showed that Security Benefit had an affiliated $185mn collateral loan backed by an investment in the Los Angeles Dodgers baseball team. The next largest user of collateral loan structures, MetLife, had just 1 per cent or $2.8bn of its total invested assets in collateral loans, and most of these were unaffiliated. Boehly owns a 20 per cent stake in the Dodgers directly, while his holding company Eldridge Industries separately holds a 7 per cent stake in the franchise, according to Sportico. NAIC officials and senior industry analysts told the FT that they were concerned that asset managers could use collateral loans to stuff insurance subsidiaries with potentially risky investments. “This is how insurance companies get in trouble — when assets that can’t be parked anywhere else are parked inside insurance companies,” one NAIC official told the FT. Several singled out Security Benefit and said they were concerned that Boehly’s asset manager could be using policyholder funds to provide cheaper financing for assets he controlled, building up a potential future funding shortfall. Under planned changes, NAIC would “look through” to the investments underlying the collateral loans, and would apply a 30 per cent capital charge when they are backed by equity stakes in companies or the equity tranches of structured investments such as collateralised loan obligations. The capital that Security Benefit would be required to hold against the $185mn loan backed by the Dodgers investment, for example, could rise from about $13mn to as much as $56mn. Two people said they expected Security Benefit to make significant changes to its investment portfolio in advance of the new rules being enacted. However, if it made no changes to its allocations, Security Benefit’s risk-based capital — a measure of its buffer to meet obligations to policyholders — could fall by as much as half, based on its latest filings. Some NAIC officials told the FT that the delay highlighted the body’s vulnerability to industry pressure. “There was no reason to delay this other than industry pressure,” one NAIC official close to the proceedings said. In a statement to the FT, Security Benefit said that since 2020 it had undergone three examinations by its regulator, the Kansas Department of Insurance, including one focused exclusively on collateral loans. These reports “reflect no material findings”, it said. Asked why it invested so heavily in affiliated assets, it said: “Our collateral loans typically have robust protections including senior secured rights in the underlying collateral.” In a letter to the NAIC, Security Benefit had urged officials to delay the rules taking effect until at least the end of 2028. The insurer argued that the data available did not suggest that there was an “an emergent solvency or policyholder protection concern that would justify emergency action”. The Kansas Department of Insurance echoed the argument from Security Benefit, telling the FT in a statement that it had argued for “a reasonable timeline for the implementation of all changes”. Eldridge Industries declined to comment.

How Does Blueco Exit Chelsea FC? 🤔 | Explained Streamed live 3 hours ago Alex and Bobby Fairview discuss the potential options that Blueco have in terms of finding a way to exit Chelsea FC. BlueCo would need to sell the club on the ten year anniversary of purchase (so sell on May 31, 2032) for almost £10 billion just to pay back the investors here is a very rough calculation spreadsheet they did in the video and all that assumes no more hidden debt is found

we are pretty likely to soon be (if not already are) a 'Sell-to-Survive' club (not even a 'Sell-to-Buy' club)

💥🔵JUST IN: Jordi Cruijff has held talks with Andoni Iraola about becoming the new head coach of Ajax. Ajax (@MikeVerweij)

massive new amount of PIK loan debt shown below (it is Cayman Islands-based, and is called COP III, it is the new facilty shown below, and it dwarfs the other 2) Around £400m a year (which will keep increasing on a year over year basis, btw) just in INTEREST COST, and likely even more as the interest shown (11.25 per cent) for COP III is likely too low per Booby Fairview. Just that interest cost, (especially if the interest rate paid on the COP III loan debt is around 14, 15 per cent per annum), could well surpass our ENTIRE gross revenue intake per annum by 2027 or so PLUS that £1.5 billion that was supposed to go to the new stadium, womens side, youth development etc, has been spent on other things No wonder Boehly was talking about no new stadium until possibly the late 2030s or more likely 2040 or later!! and it gets worse, as we still have to pay to RUN THE CLUB each year, pay the salaries, transfers, staff, current stadium and other physical plant expenses (ie training grounds, for all levels, and multiple other things) etc etc etc and all this truly affects the funds (like public pension funds)who invested in it all, and those giant funds will come head-hunting for BlueCo et al as those funds are bound by law to utilise fiduciary responsibility for their 'shareholders' (for but one example think of 10s (perhaps 100s) of thousands of school teachers and other public employees) Boehly's share of the club, due to insane losses, has already be cut basically in half in a few short years Ares Management and others, due to the way their PIK (PIK means Payment-in-Kind and refers to a financial instrument where interest or dividends are paid using additional securities (bonds/stock) instead of cash) loans (the 22 HoldCo facility for instance) are structured, can go directly after our current owners and seize all (or a huge amount) of the club we are so so fucked I am starting to really fear 🥵