Fears of civil war at Chelsea as Todd Boehly’s relationship with Clearlake reaches breaking point
There are growing concerns over a potential civil war brewing at Chelsea Football Club due to increasing tensions between Todd Boehly and the club’s co-owners, Clearlake Capital. Boehly, an American billionaire and a major stakeholder in the club, believes that his working relationship with Clearlake has deteriorated to the point where it may soon become untenable. This discord threatens to destabilize the club, both on and off the pitch, unless a resolution is reached.
The tension primarily revolves around differing visions for the future of Chelsea. Boehly and his partners, who together own 38.5% of the club, are reportedly willing to fund a full takeover of Chelsea if necessary. Boehly, who also has stakes in the LA Dodgers, believes he can raise more than £2.5 billion to make an offer to Clearlake Capital. However, Clearlake, which holds a 61.5% majority stake in the club, has firmly refused to sell any shares, asserting that it sees its investment as a long-term commitment of at least a decade.
The primary figures at Clearlake, Behdad Eghbali and José E. Feliciano, are said to be adamant about retaining their stake and have no intention of allowing Chelsea to be sold again, especially so soon after Roman Abramovich was compelled to sell the club just over two years ago. This stance has created a significant cultural and strategic divide between the co-owners, with Boehly increasingly viewing the current structure of the club as unworkable.
The relationship between Boehly and Clearlake has become increasingly strained due to these irreconcilable differences. Despite maintaining a professional front, there is a clear clash in their visions for Chelsea's future. Boehly has a 20 to 30-year plan for the club, which includes ambitious projects like building a new stadium. However, these plans have stalled due to the lack of agreement between the owners, as all major decisions require the approval of Boehly, Eghbali, and Feliciano.
The possibility of Clearlake increasing its stake in the club has also been discussed, but Boehly is reportedly unwilling to sell his shares unless Clearlake agrees to buy out the stakes held by his partners, Hansjörg Wyss and Mark Walter. This would require Clearlake to spend more than £1.5 billion, a figure that complicates any potential buyout scenario.
Further complicating matters is the fact that Clearlake and Boehly have mutual blocking rights as part of their co-ownership agreement. This means that neither party can sell their stake or bring in a third-party investor without the other's consent, adding another layer of complexity to the ongoing power struggle.
In the meantime, the day-to-day management of the club has seen significant changes, with multiple high-profile departures since the Boehly-Clearlake takeover. Former chief executive Chris Jurasek, who had been with Clearlake for a decade, is among the latest to leave, reflecting the ongoing instability within Chelsea's leadership structure. Eghbali, who has taken a more hands-on approach over the past 18 months, works closely with sporting directors Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart, while Boehly had initially intended to step back from day-to-day operations after assembling a management team.
As the situation unfolds, there is increasing concern that a full-blown civil war could erupt between Boehly and Clearlake, which would have dire consequences for Chelsea. The club’s on-field performance could suffer, and off the pitch, uncertainty around the ownership structure could further delay critical projects like the redevelopment of Stamford Bridge.
Looking ahead, one critical juncture could be the chairmanship of the club, which is currently held by Boehly. Under the terms of the ownership agreement, the chairmanship can be passed between the owners every five years, and Clearlake reportedly plans to nominate its own representative to take over the role in 2027. However, given the current tensions, it is likely that the ownership structure will undergo significant changes before then. Without a resolution, Chelsea could face a period of instability that could impact the club’s ambitions both in domestic and European competitions.
blogpay
Total Comments: 0