Chelsea deadline: Three bidders remain - but who is best placed?
- Published
The bidding process for Chelsea has been described as among the most competitive in sports history
The money is accounted for, the executive meetings are over, and they've seen Chelsea perform on the pitch.
Now, as we reach the deadline for final offers, the consortiums bidding to buy the Premier League club - for in the region of £2.5bn - can do no more.
A late withdrawal by the Ricketts family-led consortium on Friday means three groups remain in the running.
What links them is billionaire wealth, experience of running American sports teams and a desire to take the west London side to a new level.
But the differences between them will be key in deciding who replaces Roman Abramovich as owner, with a preferred bidder expected to be finalised next week before the Premier League and government approve the most expensive sports team sale in history.
It has already been described as one of the most competitive, with billionaires teaming up with other billionaires to battle it out for a prominent place in the hierarchy of Premier League and European football.
So who is best placed to succeed? It is difficult to predict an answer which lies in the hands of the Chelsea board, including chairman Bruce Buck as well as Abramovich and director Eugene Tenenbaum who have both been sanctioned by the UK government.
The bid that was first out of the blocks
Bid leader: Todd Boehly - American billionaire, owner of investment company Eldridge and co-owner of MLB franchise the Los Angeles Dodgers.
Finance boosted by: Clearlake Capital (£45bn in assets), LA Dodgers principal owner Mark Walter (£3.3bn), Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss (£3.9bn) and Jonathan Goldstein, CEO of Cain International (£7.7bn in assets).
Additional expertise: American PR executive Barbara Charone - who previously worked with Madonna - and British journalist and Conservative peer Daniel Finkelstein are part of the bid. Both are Chelsea fans.
Pros: Boehly's bid - the first to be reported - has been relatively free of controversy and has plenty of finance and sporting know-how to back it up. And Boehly has previously shown interest in buying Chelsea, so already knows the club. He is also reported to have offered fans a so-called 'golden share', meaning no major decisions on the future of Stamford Bridge or the team would be made without consulting supporters.
Cons: There have been no standout issues for Boehly's bid, which has been a long time coming and has ramped up its investment capacity as deadlines approached. But Goldstein's status as a Tottenham fan was highlighted by fellow bidder Nick Candy, who may have spoken for many supporters when he said he "does not want a lifelong Spurs fan as part of the future ownership of Chelsea".
What else? Boehly's company Eldridge has also invested in Epic, which owns the computer game Fortnite - and the billionaire has spoken about how the game has hosted tournaments watched by 10 million people. Could that mean he is well placed, alongside other American owners, to look at a revolution in how Premier League games are broadcast?
The British-led bid
Josh Harris and David Blitzer are co-owners of the New Jersey Devils, the Philadelphia 76ers and Crystal Palace
Bid leader: Sir Martin Broughton - former Liverpool and British Airways chairman
Finance boosted by: Josh Harris (£4.2bn) and David Blitzer, who co-own Crystal Palace FC and NBA team the Philadelphia 76ers. Investment banker Michael Klein is also on board but Broughton says investment has come "from around the world".
Additional expertise: Chelsea fan and World Athletics president Lord Coe
Pros: Broughton has experience of running a Premier League team, albeit for a short period, and helped broker the sale of Liverpool to Fenway Sports Group 12 years ago. He is helped by the presence of Lord Coe, whose connections at Chelsea run deep. Both are lifelong fans, and Broughton has said he is committed to "a best-in-class governance model with fans at the heart of decision-making", which would include plans for the development of Stamford Bridge.
Cons: Harris and Blitzer's investment in Crystal Palace could cause issues because Premier League rules state a person cannot acquire a "significant interest" - defined as 10% or more - if they already partly own another club. Of course, if that stake is sold, or Harris and Blitzer resign from the Palace board, the takeover can go through, but the question is if it would lead to delays in a sale everyone wants to proceed quickly. It is understood there is a plan in place should their Chelsea bid be successful, but how well former Eagles owners would go down at Chelsea is another question.
What else? Harris and Blitzer have plenty of investments through their Sports & Entertainment company, including NHL ice hockey team the New Jersey Devils. Harris, who lives in Miami, also has a minority stake in NFL team the Pittsburgh Steelers. Blitzer, who is based in New York, is a global head of tactical opportunities at investment firm Blackstone.
The quiet bidder
Steve Pagliuca (right) is a co-owner of the Boston Celtics and Bain Capital
Bid leader: Stephen Pagliuca - co-owner of the Boston Celtics, Atalanta, and Bain Capital, which has £92bn in assets.
Finance boosted by: Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin (£9bn), venture capitalist Jim Breyer (£1.6bn).
Additional expertise: Pagliuca will sit alongside NBA chair Larry Tanenbaum, who co-owns several Canadian sports teams and is the founder of a developer, which could prove handy at Stamford Bridge. Former Disney CEO Bob Iger and Peter Guber - co-owner of the Golden State Warriors and the LA Dodgers - are also on board.
Pros: Pagliuca has plenty of sporting and financial capital, though news of his interest in Chelsea only emerged after the first bidding deadline on 25 March. The 67-year-old broke his silence on Tuesday to say his "ethos has always been to operate quietly" before outlining his intentions. He struck all the right notes about making Chelsea "habitual winners", "preserving the traditions of the club" including the avoidance of a European Super League, and stating "Chelsea should be the pride of London for its on and off-field accomplishments". Pagliuca has the endorsement of the True Blue consortium, which involves former Blues captain John Terry and is aiming for a 10% stake in any new ownership.
Cons: Politician Lord Hain voiced disapproval about Bain & Company's links to alleged corruption in South Africa, but Pagliuca's camp said it was a separate entity to Bain Capital, which is not part of the Chelsea bid in any case. Pagliuca's 55% stake in Serie A team Atalanta could cause problems with Uefa, whose rules state "no individual or legal entity may have control or influence over more than one club" in its competitions. But the billionaire seemed to suggest he would take steps to "meet the respective requirements and regulations".
What else? Pagliuca has previously said a European Super League "made sense on paper" to clubs which, in contrast to those in America, faced "risks" from relegation and a lack of salary control. He also told Bloomberg in 2020 a way of mitigating against those risks was to "manage those clubs tightly." In his statement this week, however, he changed tack, saying that the Women's Super League was "the only Super League we intend competing in".
Individual financial figures taken from Forbes., external Business financial figures taking from relevant company websites.
Messi playing for Spain? Specs Gonzales dives into the multiverse to put things right on the timeline
Matt le Tissier, Steven Gerrard, and Harry Kane: Who is the greatest Premier League player never to have lifted the trophy?
