Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

QPR accounts for 2012/13 season

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Izual_Rebirth
    replied
    Originally posted by dsqpr
    I don't have any doubt that the club have spent recklessly since TF took over. Equally, I don't have any doubt that this was done for all the right reasons and TF and the Board have learned a lot in the last few years and will make fewer such mistakes going forward.

    I expect TF to be here for the long haul but if he were to leave, the problem would not be the debt owed to him and the other shareholders but rather the day to day cost of running the club, which they would no longer fund. Getting somebody to take that on would be the main problem. Without a buyer, we really would become Pompey Mark II.
    Exactly my point earlier. The debt isn't the issue. It's the fact that we're running at a deficit that is the issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • dsqpr
    replied
    I don't have any doubt that the club have spent recklessly since TF took over. Equally, I don't have any doubt that this was done for all the right reasons and TF and the Board have learned a lot in the last few years and will make fewer such mistakes going forward.

    I expect TF to be here for the long haul but if he were to leave, the problem would not be the debt owed to him and the other shareholders but rather the day to day cost of running the club, which they would no longer fund. Getting somebody to take that on would be the main problem. Without a buyer, we really would become Pompey Mark II.

    Leave a comment:


  • Izual_Rebirth
    replied
    Originally posted by Kirill
    I agree, it is very embarrassing. The current club leadership already gambled heavily with our financial and managerial situation - and lost when we got relegated despite purchasing a shedload of good players. Shudder to think what would have happened if we failed to get promoted at the 11th hour this May. Of course there were sugary soothing voices back then and they also ridiculed fellow-fans who dared to think and look back at the examples of Portsmouth, etc. The same reckless gamble is happening again now and the same sugary/mocking voices are back. Oh how we like to lambast Flavio and Co for refusing to buy new players for the PL towards the end of their tenure. But maybe they had it right, maybe it is useless trying to buy survival - without ensuring team spirit because spirited performances by mediocre players are better than gutless surrenders by supposedly good players.
    Great post.

    I know I come across as being negative but I have the clubs best interests in my heart.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kirill
    replied
    I agree, it is very embarrassing. The current club leadership already gambled heavily with our financial and managerial situation - and lost when we got relegated despite purchasing a shedload of good players. Shudder to think what would have happened if we failed to get promoted at the 11th hour this May. Of course there were sugary soothing voices back then and they also ridiculed fellow-fans who dared to think and look back at the examples of Portsmouth, etc. The same reckless gamble is happening again now and the same sugary/mocking voices are back. Oh how we like to lambast Flavio and Co for refusing to buy new players for the PL towards the end of their tenure. But maybe they had it right, maybe it is useless trying to buy survival - without ensuring team spirit because spirited performances by mediocre players are better than gutless surrenders by supposedly good players.

    Leave a comment:


  • CroydonCaptainJack
    replied
    Originally posted by Jimmy Rabbit
    Embarrassing
    Totally!

    Leave a comment:


  • Jimmy Floyd Rabbit
    replied
    Originally posted by Izual_Rebirth
    Well if we get relegated... which is looks like we are... we're f***ed.
    Embarrassing

    Leave a comment:


  • Izual_Rebirth
    replied
    Well if we get relegated... which is looks like we are... we're f***ed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buffalo
    replied
    It seems that when you become manager you get total control of all club finances and can spend whatever you want. Never mind the chairman, board and accountants...

    Leave a comment:


  • theblackmafia.
    replied
    Originally posted by Izual_Rebirth
    You mean the same Southampton and Bournemouth that have both suffered from going into administration after Redknapp had managed them? And the same Spurs team that he left because he wasn't allowed to spend as much as he wanted?
    The clubs he left 5 years before they went into admin?!

    Leave a comment:


  • Izual_Rebirth
    replied
    Originally posted by kron-1664
    Nothing to do with harry. If they are willing to spend its their responsibility to make sure they can afford it. Saints Spurs West Ham and Bournemouth are doing OK.
    You mean the same Southampton and Bournemouth that have both suffered from going into administration after Redknapp had managed them? And the same Spurs team that he left because he wasn't allowed to spend as much as he wanted?

    Leave a comment:


  • MattyRangers
    replied
    Originally posted by QPR Richard
    Why do people say in a matter of fact way that they know how much a player earns and the details of his contract? I don't believe anyone on here knows.
    Most menials don't. Some of us more important posters do though.

    Leave a comment:


  • QPR Richard
    replied
    Why do people say in a matter of fact way that they know how much a player earns and the details of his contract? I don't believe anyone on here knows.

    Leave a comment:


  • MattyRangers
    replied
    Originally posted by dsqpr
    The 35-year-old has been persuaded to take a massive drop in wages after hearing Harry Redknapp’s plans for how he can help the London club on their return to the Premier League.

    It is believed his salary is less than a third of his £200,000-a-week salary at Manchester United.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz382JP9p00
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter ** DailyMail on Facebook


    I realize this is not the most reliable source but it does suggest he will be on around 60K-65K per week. My guess is that is pretty close to the truth. If he helps us to stay up it will be money well spent. The key is for it to be a one year deal.
    Rio's basic wage with us is £40k per week. Usual bonuses on top for clean sheets etc. He could have bagged triple the wages we offered to move to the MLS but wants 1 more year in the PL to shown he's still got it.

    Leave a comment:


  • kron-1664
    replied
    Originally posted by dsqpr
    What we know for certain is that Pompey are in League Two now.

    And Harry managed them. And spent a lot of money that they didn't have.

    It seems pretty clear to me that that fate could await us if we don't manage things better than Pompey did.
    Nothing to do with harry. If they are willing to spend its their responsibility to make sure they can afford it. Saints Spurs West Ham and Bournemouth are doing OK.

    Leave a comment:


  • theblackmafia.
    replied
    "QPR fans believe anything, literally anything the dozy cùnts" said the journo to the editor.

    Leave a comment:

Working...