An email dropped into the inbox of various football reporters this week from the Chelsea Supporters' Trust.
The correspondence, sent on the Trust's behalf by its vice-chair Dominic Rosso, outlined their wholehearted commitment to seeing at least a modicum of their club owned by supporters.
"We believe it is imperative that supporters have a stake in any sale of the club," read the CST statement on Tuesday evening, with that particular detail bolded up for emphasis.
"Given the unique circumstances of the proposed sale of the club, we believe there is an opportunity here to demonstrate English football governance’s commitment to transparency and meaningful supporter input."
In the letter that was addressed to the Minister for Sport, Tracey Crouch, the CST added that they 'believe there is a real opportunity here to demonstrate that UK and football authorities are serious about improving governance within English football'.
It continued: "I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss how we can best achieve positive change for football supporters; how we can work towards the implementation of recommendations made in the Fan-led Review; and how we can ensure that the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) are aware of the opportunity."
READ MORE: Thierry Henry sends Kylian Mbappe Liverpool transfer message after Real Madrid defeat
READ MORE: Liverpool's secret creative weapon is being let down by his team-mates
Within 48 hours, it had been announced that the UK Government had placed huge sanctions on Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich, ones that could have huge ramifications for the Londoners both in the short and long term.
As a result of the actions taken and announced on Thursday morning, Chelsea - who remain rivals to Liverpool in all three of the Premier League, FA Cup and Champions League this season - are now unable to move anywhere near as freely as they did when Abramovich was signing the cheques.
The Russian's hastily cobbled together exit plan for a quick sale has been frozen and the club's board have set up the most emergency of meetings for Thursday afternoon.
"The CST notes with concern the Government's statement regarding the owner," came a new statement on Thursday morning.
"Supporters must be involved in any conversation regarding ongoing impacts on the club and its global fan base.
"The CST implores the Government to conduct a swift process to minimise the uncertainty over Chelsea's future, for supporters and for supporters to be given a golden share as part of a sale of the club."
Under the new restrictions, ticket sales to both home and away fans are prohibited, no official merchandise can be purchased and, perhaps most pertinently of all for those watching from the outside, no transfers or contract renewals are allowed.
The news has shone the harshest light yet on just who is allowed to own football clubs in the UK.
"It's sad that it has taken a war in Ukraine to sort out the sportswashing in this country," says one source.
Abramovich's tenure is not a new one, of course, but his near two-decade run as Chelsea owner appears as though it is about to end as spectacularly as it began back in 2003 when he bankrolled the rise of a new giant of European football.
His arrival on these shores changed the landscape of the British game after leaving the door ajar for a succession of billionaires to follow.
That includes the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund that purchased Newcastle United back in October to make them - or their owners, at least - the most wealthy on the planet.
But while some Magpies fans immediately dreamt up the scenarios of the players who the club were now suddenly able to attract purely because of their wealth, others took a more sober view, questioning just how a regime with a history of horrendous human rights' abuse could be given the keys to a Premier League football club.
Those types of questions, like the ones that surround the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi - an ardent and frequent critic of Arab kingdom's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - were given vague lip service by many at the time, but have so far amounted to little beyond the occasional press conference grilling of manager Eddie Howe.
“I understand that questions have to be asked about the human rights issues, it’s really important that we don’t brush them under the carpet," said Newcastle legend Alan Shearer in October, before proceeding to lift up the mat and grab a broom.
"We have to educate ourselves on that and this will highlight that even more.”
Five months on, however, Newcastle have been able to go about their business as normal, catapulting themselves up the table thanks to a January spend of about £90m.
In short, it's going according to the exact plan at St James' Park.
But the Chelsea news has to be the catalyst towards a widespread, root-and-branch review over just whose money is snatched gleefully in the Premier League offices.
For Liverpool, the club themselves have been working closer with supporters' union the Spirit of Shankly since the Super League debacle fell flat on its backside 11 months ago.
SOS met with Liverpool CEO Billy Hogan back in May in an attempt to safeguard over a similar move in the future.
What followed was a fairly groundbreaking agreement to have it written into the club's articles of association that would remain binding for the current or future owners.
Put simply, it would not allow the owners to ride roughshod with their top-level decision making on issues that would directly affect supporters, such as a plan to join a Super League of any kind.
"We were clear with our expectations when we met with Liverpool in May," said SOS chair Joe Blott in November.
"We wanted meaningful fan engagement. They showed contrition and leadership and a commitment to switch the principles back on that they had taken away through the Super League plans.
"They have recognised the need to embed democracy through supporter trusts, whether it is us now or someone else in the future. Having this in the articles of association would be extremely powerful and that is to be welcomed."
It is hoped that the Government will now be guided by the principles of the Fan-led Review into ownership when it is decided just who and who isn't allowed to play ball in the richest league in world football.
Whatever happens next at Stamford Bridge and the wider consequences of how it affects English football is just about anyone's guess.
But this could quite possibly be the straw that breaks the camel's back with regards to Premier League ownership and just who is permitted to be part of that select few.
