Regarding the latest, it's not fair whinge

comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 5 minutes ago
According to this article the possible link between Chelsea and the Saudis was thoroughly investigated during the sale of the club and the authorities are completely satisfied that there is no involvement by them I Chelsea’s business.
===========

OP, at the time of the sale there was nothing to worry?

How blind are these officials?

Have you seen since then how many players Saudi clubs owned by PIA are paying millions for some of the unwanted Chelsea players which will help Chelsea to balance the books, and get players Poch would be asking for?

Not smart - outright cheating
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How much exactly?

I know you would like us to give them away but you name a price and if the buyer is willing to pay you get a deal. That's how all clubs work and how we got 50 million from the Chinese for Oscar, I wonder how much we'd get for him now.

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 minute ago

City are under investigation for mutiple accusations, and there is no fire without smoke.

--------------------------------------------
Classic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess it depends on what fuel you are using 😄

comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 hours, 34 minutes ago
comment by SimonB (U22811)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tway (U1162)
posted 2 minutes ago
I don't see the point of discussing this with rival fans... Many know the truth of the situation that Chelsea FC behaved according to the rules as they currently are.
And endorsed by the FA as "no issue".
Being smart doesn't mean cheating.
But I'm not holding any breath trying to persuade these few fans who will stick to their guns no matter what.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Says the guy that was defending putin last year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How is that connected?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Typically no answer from the troll...
Since you mentioned Putin ..I would ask you assuming you are British...how you would feel if an unfriendly country occupied the Channel Islands and brought in nuclear installations, despite having signed an earlier treaty that they would not do this? Don't bother to answer this either...as off topic and totally unconnected.

People putting 2 & 2 together & coming up with 5. This just seems like the perfect storm for us, PIF want players in the Saudi league to increase it's profile & money/wages isn't an issue & we've got a sh!t ton of high earners who we wanna offload, thus I'm sure are offering them out to these clubs as we know that's the best option for us provided the players are up for it (and reportedly a few aren't). If we were in this pickle in 2016 we'd be doing the same with Chinese clubs.

I believe wants transpiring here is something called business

At first, I did wonder whether something was odd... But I have to say I'm struggling with the numbers to demonstrate significant influence. Anyone in investment / private equities to shed proper light on this?

Clearlake funded 60% of the overall x $5bn purchase price = $3bn

This represents 4% of the overall fund size ($3bn / $70bn = 4%)

We know that no individual investor owns more than 5% of the fund, so PIF's interest in Chelsea is a maximum of 0.2% (4% x 5% = 0.2%)

So the financial incentive for PIF is what exactly? To pay Ziyech et al 100% of their salaries, to gain very little on their clearlake investment? Plus, clearlake is regulated in the US... if there is any conflict of interest they would need to inform all investors of the fund.

Just can't make sense of the argument so if anyone is in the industry then let us know!

comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 2 hours, 56 minutes ago
At first, I did wonder whether something was odd... But I have to say I'm struggling with the numbers to demonstrate significant influence. Anyone in investment / private equities to shed proper light on this?

Clearlake funded 60% of the overall x $5bn purchase price = $3bn

This represents 4% of the overall fund size ($3bn / $70bn = 4%)

We know that no individual investor owns more than 5% of the fund, so PIF's interest in Chelsea is a maximum of 0.2% (4% x 5% = 0.2%)

So the financial incentive for PIF is what exactly? To pay Ziyech et al 100% of their salaries, to gain very little on their clearlake investment? Plus, clearlake is regulated in the US... if there is any conflict of interest they would need to inform all investors of the fund.

Just can't make sense of the argument so if anyone is in the industry then let us know!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are making the mistake of thinking that the Saudi's are in this for money.

None of what they are doing in sport is about money. The LIV golf thing paid massive sums to players just to join. $100m to Koepka $125m to Johnson.

What they want is position and influence so its not about financial returns, at least not in the short term. Its about taking a stake in something like this, highly valuable, either directly or indirectly, and being able to exert some control. Their wealth is so vast that all of this is just peanuts to them. The PIF is worth circa $650bn

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 2 hours, 56 minutes ago
At first, I did wonder whether something was odd... But I have to say I'm struggling with the numbers to demonstrate significant influence. Anyone in investment / private equities to shed proper light on this?

Clearlake funded 60% of the overall x $5bn purchase price = $3bn

This represents 4% of the overall fund size ($3bn / $70bn = 4%)

We know that no individual investor owns more than 5% of the fund, so PIF's interest in Chelsea is a maximum of 0.2% (4% x 5% = 0.2%)

So the financial incentive for PIF is what exactly? To pay Ziyech et al 100% of their salaries, to gain very little on their clearlake investment? Plus, clearlake is regulated in the US... if there is any conflict of interest they would need to inform all investors of the fund.

Just can't make sense of the argument so if anyone is in the industry then let us know!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are making the mistake of thinking that the Saudi's are in this for money.

None of what they are doing in sport is about money. The LIV golf thing paid massive sums to players just to join. $100m to Koepka $125m to Johnson.

What they want is position and influence so its not about financial returns, at least not in the short term. Its about taking a stake in something like this, highly valuable, either directly or indirectly, and being able to exert some control. Their wealth is so vast that all of this is just peanuts to them. The PIF is worth circa $650bn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're basically saying that it's less about chelsea doing wrong, more that Saudi can go and buy anyone they want without financial restrictions. And that's the case with any players from any clubs. Got it.

I'm not overly concerned about Saudi in long term. Feels to me like we've seen a lot of it before, US, Russia, China.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 2 hours, 56 minutes ago
At first, I did wonder whether something was odd... But I have to say I'm struggling with the numbers to demonstrate significant influence. Anyone in investment / private equities to shed proper light on this?

Clearlake funded 60% of the overall x $5bn purchase price = $3bn

This represents 4% of the overall fund size ($3bn / $70bn = 4%)

We know that no individual investor owns more than 5% of the fund, so PIF's interest in Chelsea is a maximum of 0.2% (4% x 5% = 0.2%)

So the financial incentive for PIF is what exactly? To pay Ziyech et al 100% of their salaries, to gain very little on their clearlake investment? Plus, clearlake is regulated in the US... if there is any conflict of interest they would need to inform all investors of the fund.

Just can't make sense of the argument so if anyone is in the industry then let us know!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are making the mistake of thinking that the Saudi's are in this for money.

None of what they are doing in sport is about money. The LIV golf thing paid massive sums to players just to join. $100m to Koepka $125m to Johnson.

What they want is position and influence so its not about financial returns, at least not in the short term. Its about taking a stake in something like this, highly valuable, either directly or indirectly, and being able to exert some control. Their wealth is so vast that all of this is just peanuts to them. The PIF is worth circa $650bn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0 2% isn't much influence either is it?

comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 13 hours, 48 minutes ago

City are under investigation for mutiple accusations, and there is no fire without smoke.

--------------------------------------------
Classic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 2 hours, 56 minutes ago
At first, I did wonder whether something was odd... But I have to say I'm struggling with the numbers to demonstrate significant influence. Anyone in investment / private equities to shed proper light on this?

Clearlake funded 60% of the overall x $5bn purchase price = $3bn

This represents 4% of the overall fund size ($3bn / $70bn = 4%)

We know that no individual investor owns more than 5% of the fund, so PIF's interest in Chelsea is a maximum of 0.2% (4% x 5% = 0.2%)

So the financial incentive for PIF is what exactly? To pay Ziyech et al 100% of their salaries, to gain very little on their clearlake investment? Plus, clearlake is regulated in the US... if there is any conflict of interest they would need to inform all investors of the fund.

Just can't make sense of the argument so if anyone is in the industry then let us know!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are making the mistake of thinking that the Saudi's are in this for money.

None of what they are doing in sport is about money. The LIV golf thing paid massive sums to players just to join. $100m to Koepka $125m to Johnson.

What they want is position and influence so its not about financial returns, at least not in the short term. Its about taking a stake in something like this, highly valuable, either directly or indirectly, and being able to exert some control. Their wealth is so vast that all of this is just peanuts to them. The PIF is worth circa $650bn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're basically saying that it's less about chelsea doing wrong, more that Saudi can go and buy anyone they want without financial restrictions. And that's the case with any players from any clubs. Got it.

I'm not overly concerned about Saudi in long term. Feels to me like we've seen a lot of it before, US, Russia, China.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ans that nailed on the head summary sent the half wit troll packing. Great analysis Jesus