It appears full steam ahead in the Chelsea takeover process with the consortium led by Todd Boehly going through its period of exclusivity, having emerged as the favoured bid over other prospective owners in Martin Broughton and Stephen Pagliuca.
While there has been uncertainty over the status of Roman Ambraovich's loan to the club in recent days, there remains plenty of confidence that there will be no need to explore other options. Boehly and Clearlake are in a prime position to be the next owners of the Blues, and the expectation is that they will be able to complete the deal.
Nevertheless, Jim Ratcliffe and INEOS have attempted to play a role in the process with a late bid that missed deadlines to Raine Group for initial expression of interest and placing a firm bid. The owners of cycling team INEOS Grenadiers and Mercedes have heard little in response to their bid but have communicated with the government and the supporter's trust.
READ MORE: Todd Boehly must solidify Chelsea's identity to ensure Thomas Tuchel finds next Conor Gallagher
Despite not appearing to be part of the formal process, the last week has seen numerous public briefings and statements of intent from the group, with Ratcliffe providing an interview on Wednesday evening, despite the progress of Boehly's bid. football.london takes a look at what Radcliffe says in his BBC interview below:
He said: "I don't know Todd, and I don't know his group. What I do know is I spent quite a few years of my life working in the world of venture capital and private equity. Your focus is always on how I invest and make that money grow, and it's typically a five-year time horizon - and their main funder is private equity and venture capital.
"If we want to make money, we make money on chemicals, oil and gas and that sort of thing. We're not interested in making money out of Chelsea. The investment in Chelsea is a long term thing - can we run that club really well and turn it into one of the finest clubs in the world?"
In many respects, Radcliffe's intentions perhaps would seem to closely follow those of Abramovich with an intention to improve the club without expectation of returns. However, prefacing his statement with not knowing Boehly's group before suggesting the negative impact that Clearlake is not a fantastic look and feels like a very public relations move.
There will be concerns about the impact a venture capital group could have, but his suggestion of a five-year turnaround would be very ambitious, particularly with plans to resolve the stadium situation while remaining at Stamford Bridge. That has already proved not to be a quick process.
"We presented them [Raine Group] with an offer at the end of last week. We haven't heard a great deal back from them, which is disappointing given we are a wholly British bid, and we did place an offer in the week offers were placed. We were late, and that's our fault, I would agree with that. It's a big responsibility, and it's a big commitment. It's a big commitment both in terms of time and money. We're not there for five years or ten years. We'd be there for the long term, and that's quite the commitment. It takes time to reach a decision where you feel fully committed to that. Maybe our time to make that decision didn't quite fit with this quite rapid timetable, but we got there at the end of the day. We are quite committed to that proposal that we've made, and that proposal we've made includes a commitment to spend £1.75bn over the next ten years.
"We had a communication with Raine at the end of last week where we presented a bid, but we've had very little back from them since. I don't know; there's been no communication, it's a shame. I'd have expected at least a courtesy of a call, but we didn't get one.
"I'd say don't discount our offer we are very British, we've got great intentions for the Chelsea club. I think it's a very good offer. It's a very important British asset, and I think consideration should be given to a British bid.
"We've had positive conversations with the government. Roman, I don't know. Only sort of friends, colleagues in the sports world, because we're obviously quite big in the sports world, because there's been quite a lot of angst about Chelsea finishing up in the hands of people who don't have a long term vision for it."
Expecting responses after missing deadlines, at a very busy time for Raine Group, even in courtesy, appears a little hopeful and even hypocritical. That said, supporters and Chelsea would likely hope for the best bid to be successful regardless of when it comes in. If the bid was good enough, caveats would likely be made.
With Chelsea's government licence set to expire at the end of the month, time is a pressing issue. However and the fact a bid is 'British' does little to resolve concerns that have come with such a late bid. It is not suprising that a group may want time to consider a bit, but Radcliffe's name has been linked to Chelsea for a number of years, and was reluctant to spend billions. In 2019 he suggested: "Ineos has always tried to take a sensible approach. We don’t like squandering money or we wouldn’t be where we are today."
Investment of £1.75 billion over ten years is obviously a strong commitment to outline, but it has already emerged that INEOS' bid has not financially met their opponents' offerings. Radcliffe's concerns over the 'long term vision' of other parties may be valid, but there is little of substance unveiled to support his own or validate his issues.
"I don't think it's consistently been where you would put a Real Madrid, a Barcelona, a Bayern Munich, and it's a notch below Liverpool and Man City at the moment. It's about consistency, though, isn't it. Liverpool are having a fantastic time at the moment, but for 20 years, they didn't really win a great deal. United were very good, and over the last ten years, they haven't done. If you look at Bayern Munich or Real Madrid, they're more present in that company of the top eight, the quarter-finals of the Champions League and consistently there over a long period of time, and there hasn't been a London club that's achieved that. I think Chelsea's been exceptionally well managed over the last ten years. I think Roman has been a good owner.
"No, I think we're very committed to Nice. We need to figure out how we manage that. We need to finish the Chelsea chapter before we go down that road.
"Manchester United are not for sale. I think if I owned Chelsea, I would have to support Chelsea. It's in your DNA, your original club is deep-rooted, it would be a tough one."
Becoming one of the best and most high profile clubs in the world is certainly an ambition for Chelsea, but it is likely the target for any prospective owner, even one preoccupied with making an offer on the club. Chelsea have been consistent in winning trophies during Abramovich's tenure, even if they have fallen behind Liverpool and Man City in recent years.
The lack of a clear answer on the ownership of Nice is the biggest concern. The French side could qualify for Europe next season, which means both they and Chelsea would be unable to compete, and a resolution is required. Given the time constraints of the bid, that feels like a problem that could slow things down.
