Roman Abramovich Thread

[ZAPHOD2319 4,476]

Chelsea takeover: Todd Boehly speaks about his ownership philosophy

Prospective new Chelsea owner Todd Boehly, whose consortium was chosen as the ‘preferred bidder’ last week, has discussed his ownership philosophy at a conference in Los Angeles.

Boehly is already a part-owner of baseball’s LA Dodgers and more recently acquired a stake in the LA Lakers. He fronts the bid that also includes Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss, which is expected to be successful despite late competition from British petrochemicals magnate Sir Jim Ratcliffe.

The American initially made his fortune in finance and has spoken openly about ensuring there is affordability for fans in order to fill stadiums – the example he used was Dodger Stadium. He also mentioned pursuing big brands, which could be a huge revenue opportunity for Chelsea.

“There’s nothing like sports to excite passion. And if you have passion, then you have people who care about things. And if you have people who care about things, you have great opportunity. And really, it’s about curating that experience, that access, that opportunity,” Boehly said.

“We’ll have four million people coming out to Dodger Stadium this year. So, our goal is to give them the best possible experience. We still have the most affordable tickets in the league basically, for a stadium that’s full regularly,” he added.

“When you look at how we think about price points, and how we think about sports, we just believe they’re not making more of them, so implicit in that is scarcity value.

“We’ve been really focused on just the super big brands. In some sports like the NFL, they share all the media money. In baseball, you’re really a derivative of your local market.

“The Premier League is similar. If you look at the way it works, to be one of the big brands, you have a structural advantage. And for us, we’re always looking for structural advantages.”

https://www.90min.com/posts/Chelsea-takeover-todd-boehly-ownership-philosophy

[Superblue 6,370]

32 minutes ago, Vesper said:

I am so fucking stressed

there is a real shot we go under if Roman wants to blow us up

🤬

I struggle to see how it would get to this point and feel some things are being sensationalised now. There will be a lot of posturing and negotiating now towards sorting this out.

There has always been the question mark over how the loan is being settled or written off and it is something that needs to be negotiated with the Government. As the loan is tied to the purchase price, one thing I did read was the possibility of the new owners buying the club with the debt and repaying it once sanctions have been lifted in the future.

The problem with the Government is as clear as day on a couple of the posts above and it already appears like they've earmarked some of the sales proceeds for grassroots football in the UK, when Roman has already intended on charitable causes regarding the war in Ukraine. This to me suggests the arrogance of the UK government that this money is coming to them and they'll disburse how they see fit (the cynic in me believes more than likely a fraction will end up in charity, and the rest will be lining their own coffers). I wouldn't be surprised if Roman is looking at a way or means to block this even if it means the funds sit in a frozen account for the time being. I wouldn't trust this Government as far as I could throw them.

Ultimately so long as the funds aren't being passed over to Roman now, I don't see why the government will want the headache of blocking a sale when they've stated time and time again that it's about Roman. If they were that concerned about the damage they could do to the club they'd seize us and sell us themselves if they're that confident that their reasonings for sanctioning him in the first place are completely justified.

 

[Strike 7,217]

Have the others like Matt Law, The Athletic confirmed that Times story?

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[King Kante 1,474]

18 minutes ago, Strike said:

Have the others like Matt Law, The Athletic confirmed that Times story?

The Times have had a number of articles pilling into the club since the sanctions. There was one that said we should be relegated. Ignore anything from them, they have been throwing red meat articles out since the start of this. 

[Pizy 18,368]

Just when it seemed as though the end of this mess was in sight another massive hurdle is put up throwing the whole thing into doubt.

If I was Tuchel and this shit drags on for longer I’d seriously consider walking.

[Superblue 6,370]

2 minutes ago, King Kante said:

The Times have had a number of articles pilling into the club since the sanctions. There was one that said we should be relegated. Ignore anything from them, they have been throwing red meat articles out since the start of this. 

I think it's important to note there has been a lot of scaremongering since the sanctions started through the media. 

At one point we'd be travelling by bus across the continent, then we had our bank frozen and couldn't even fuel the team bus to travel to games. There was then also talk that we couldn't pay wages in March and players were looking into escape clauses in their contracts if they weren't paid. And now the threats of league expulsion and Roman backing out of a sale.

At present it's another 'sources' story which gives very little evidence of being backed up. 

At present Boehly over the next couple of days is in a period of exclusivity and assuming that proceeds with no hitches I'm confident then things will move on from there. 

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[Superblue 6,370]

 

[Superblue 6,370]

 

[Mário César 975]

Just now, Superblue_1986 said:

 

So...?

[Superblue 6,370]

This above report I would expect to be more correct, and the scaremongering has come from this.

I assume there will have to be some form of binding agreement in place within the sale that either (a) the debt is written off once sanctions are lifted by Roman in some form or (b) the initial price is, say, £1bn which goes to Government for charity, with the remaining £1.5bn to repay the loan once sanctions are lifted.

I would imagine this is quite a complex issue which requires discussions with a number of parties (Roman, Chelsea, Boehly, Premier League for FFP purposes, Government for licensing issues) and is probably a point of serious discussion/negotiation to resolve in the most efficient way possible.

The easiest way to do this would be for the Government licence to allow Roman to convert his debt to equity at the point of the sale. It makes the most sense but then not a lot of this has made much sense the last couple of months.

[ZAPHOD2319 4,476]

 

[Laylabelle 9,351]

What I found interesting and was picked up on others. Roman said about money to victims of the war. He never said it would all go to Ukraine. Know most likely would but think that's why a lot of people and media were a bit hmmm hang on...

[Blues Forever 1,232]

 

[ChelseaFanUK 1,014]

If i woke up to the news Ratcliffe had took over, id not be shocked.  Timing of everything seems real convenient.   Hasnt he also met the CST already since Friday?

 

I still think it'll be Boehly, but the timing of Ratcliffe's bid, the bypassing of Raine, which would indicate a deal directly between him and Roman/the club; and the talks with buck and Uk govt already, [plus the fact he would pass due dilligence with the govt almost immediately] id suspect on paper, Roman prefers his offer.  And even though i still think Todd's group get it as said, I don't think it's quite cut and dried. 

Talk that he cannot progress his bid until Boehly's exclusivity expires makes no sense because 1. There is no exclusivity yet, I'm sure Matt Law would have reported that, seeing as he is in bed with one of Boehly's team, and 2. Roman CAN still reject the offer, this exclusivity period does not mean you absolutely have got the club signed, sealed and delivered

Thats just me speculating, though

Edited May 4, 2022 by ChelseaFanUK