Bison Report post Posted April 29 If Ratcliffe was serious about buying the club he would acted sooner than today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Diddymen Report post Posted April 29 13 minutes ago, Bison said: If Ratcliffe was serious about buying the club he would acted sooner than today. I agree. In addition, he hasn’t spoken to the various Chelsea fan groups Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phoenix Blue Report post Posted April 29 Also that extra 1.75 billion pounds is spread over 10 years and includes the money for the stadium rebuilt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bison Report post Posted April 29 20 minutes ago, Diddymen said: I agree. In addition, he hasn’t spoken to the various Chelsea fan groups Exactly. All we have is a nicely worded statement whereas Boehly's consortium has cleared every hurdle during the process. Jist last month Ineos said Chelsea was overvalued and the stadium needed too much work. What's changed? Seems incredibly fishy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chara Report post Posted April 29 I share all the concerns voiced by everyone on here but I have to keep reminding myself that all the information available to us is pretty much filtered through the Media. As often as not a closer look at an "exclusive" reveals nothing but a reshuffling of words and a presentation more fitted to seeking an editor's approval for an article than fresh information...easy example is the 4bn offer which on deeper reading is not that at all. I find it illogical that a "bidder" would appear out of nowhere with a great deal of financial investment without a great deal of research and involvement with the whole process. Eventually all will be settled and a new era will begin with all the hopes and fears as expressed by the Fan base. Beware Your Dreams Come True...... I have a concern that any multi entity bid could lead to internal battles and the bottom line for a consortium is a return of some sort for the investment. RA appeared to have been satisfied with Chelsea seeking and winning titles.trophys....I worry that any mix of egos seek different returns. My first reaction to the Ratcliffe bid was one of relief as it appears to be just one head honcho and personal whims but reflection brings a cloudier view. No clearer to me than at the beginning of the farce. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sleeping Dave Report post Posted April 29 5 hours ago, Liquidator said: INEOS statement...!! That’s exactly what you want to read from a future owner of your club. I don’t mean to come across as ungrateful, but I’d much prefer a British owner to an American one. However, it seems the club prefers Boehly. If so, that groups bid must be better. I’ll confess to not having spent too much time or effort to try and understand what each offer actually would mean to the club. Does anyone have the elevator pitch for each bid? Or has that not been disclosed to any greater detail outside of the people evaluating the bids? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
boratsbrother Report post Posted April 29 2 hours ago, Sciatika said: Ratcliffe may be a better offer in money terms but I would much prefer an owner with a clear vision What vision did Roman have beyond wanting Chelsea to win trophies? Ratcliffe is the nearest to Roman's way of thinking as we're ever going to get, so I dont understand why a number of you are against his bid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
exiledblue Report post Posted April 29 2 minutes ago, Ham said: Ratcliffe looks good, that would be my choice. Even if she(he) was an after thought Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chara Report post Posted April 29 44 minutes ago, Ham said: Ham...pure GOLD as always. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpeg.62603846fc3a28a7c3cb85283f8459b6.jpeg)