Hopefully QPR’s owners don’t care about the club - Scott Jones = no free tickets!

[QPRDave]

TF took over a club in the PL, threw more money at us than all bar a few clubs in the entire country, and two years later we're in the Championship, not looking like we're going back up this year, with massive debts an ageing squad with barely any resale value and a massive and unsustainable wage bill.

I dunno what that is but it's not doing something right. What proof were you looking for?

What you got?....Other than what if they all run out on us?...

[QPRDave]

Do you know that from experience Dave ,cos he`s all matching for me

...he's such a tart that nw!

[NW_Hoopz]

Do you really believe QPR was bought to plug an airline? I certainly don't. Two totally unrelated industries and the commercial mix doesn't make sense.

Come on Richard, I had you down as an intelligent poster.

'Stacey-Island' aside, the only money to be made from Football for Uncle T is if we are in the PROMISED LAND and he gets his face & AirAsia all over the Far Eastern media ......... Unlimited 'free' advertising !

PS just to reiterate my position, I have no ill feelings towards Uncle T , and his business plan is pure genius, it really is ! ! !

Richard none of us can change it, we really can't, all we can do is hope all the cards land right for us/uncle T cause any slip up in his plan could spell the end for us.

IMO of course !


.

[Geng]

Do you really believe QPR was bought to plug an airline? I certainly don't. Two totally unrelated industries and the commercial mix doesn't make sense.

As for doing anything about it, you're advocating fans 'look' more critically rather actually doing something. You're happy to complain endlessly on the internet about the owners intentions, but you're not willing to get up off your aris and oppose the plans.

If you don't like it, why don't you do something about it?

Yeah I agree. The running costs of a PL club are never going to justify any amount of PR for the owner/sponsor. But QPR bought as a means to break into the big NW London development? Yeah I believe that was a big part of why TF got involved (maybe the main reason, I dunno).

This is the interwebs, we're here to argue. My main targets are the people here uncritically slurping up whatever the board says to them.

[Geng]

Who are these banks we owe money to? As far as I know we've taken a loan against the new stadium which could be paid back if it doesn't go ahead. The rest of the money is cash injections by the share holders not the banks. I suggest you're scaremongering.

As for HR, have you considered the possibility he might just be a short term strategy rather than long term?

Ok I was conflating banks with "external debts" more generally. Point being that it's all very well saying "our debts are only to our owners!!", which is true, for now. But if something changed tomorrow, we'd still need to cough up 60k for Barton's wages next week. And that money would have to come from somewhere, be it bank loans or whatever. Or we'd just have more debts, but this time it'd be external debts to people and institutions who would eventually call it in.

[QPR Richard]

Ok I was conflating banks with "external debts" more generally. Point being that it's all very well saying "our debts are only to our owners!!", which is true, for now. But if something changed tomorrow, we'd still need to cough up 60k for Barton's wages next week. And that money would have to come from somewhere, be it bank loans or whatever. Or we'd just have more debts, but this time it'd be external debts to people and institutions who would eventually call it in.

One of the more comforting things is that we have four shareholders and I don't believe all four would walk at the same time. I am of the opinion that if TF's consortium walked, Amit would buy them out, obviously with the help of his in-law.

[QPRDave]

Ok I was conflating banks with "external debts" more generally. Point being that it's all very well saying "our debts are only to our owners!!", which is true, for now. But if something changed tomorrow, we'd still need to cough up 60k for Barton's wages next week. And that money would have to come from somewhere, be it bank loans or whatever. Or we'd just have more debts, but this time it'd be external debts to people and institutions who would eventually call it in.

But if... What if they don't leave. They have given every indication....indication?..what am i talking about?..They have out right come out time and time again to reassure you and others
that they are here for the long term.

[NW_Hoopz]

One of the more comforting things is that we have four shareholders and I don't believe all four would walk at the same time. I am of the opinion that if TF's consortium walked, Amit would buy them out, obviously with the help of his in-law.

That would be the ideal solution if things goes belly up .......... Lets all hope we never have to find out Eh !

[QPR Richard]

Yeah I agree. The running costs of a PL club are never going to justify any amount of PR for the owner/sponsor. But QPR bought as a means to break into the big NW London development? Yeah I believe that was a big part of why TF got involved (maybe the main reason, I dunno).

This is the interwebs, we're here to argue. My main targets are the people here uncritically slurping up whatever the board says to them.

I'm not convinced QPR was bought to get a foot hold into Old Oak. I don't think it was necessary to acquire a football club to build a housing and business development. The area is in need of regeneration and the housing plans had government backing.

Perhaps when we see more detail of the development and some real plans for the stadium and its uses, more people will be convinced of the overall plan for the club, not just for our generation, but those to come.

It's good to have differing opinions. Would be a boring world if we all thought alike.

[NW_Hoopz]

Do you know that from experience Dave ,cos he`s all matching for me

Only because you treat me special honey ........

...he's such a tart that nw!

Where as with you Dave, you're all 'roll on - roll off' in the back of the van !

[Stanley]

I'm sure they were, initially. Portsmouth, for instance, went bust as a former owner did demand his ££ back, along with the banks.

You're sure your other examples (Leeds, Parma, Valencia) were...or you know for a fact? Fit and proper tests were introduced in 2004, some time after Leeds' troubles and they didnt apply in Italy and Spain. And on a side-note Gaydamak owned 100% of Portsmouth whose net worth is dwarfed by Fernandes' consortium alone, let alone the Mittals.

And if our owners do decide to stop throwing money at us, suddenly we will owe money to banks. Our wage bill alone is far more than our revenue.

There's that word again

[Nick]

That's not true at all. Fans do have some (limited) power in these situations. If we just sit back and accept our 126 year old club is just another part of a business plan to plug an airline and build a mega-multi-complex then, yes, we won't be very effective.

I'm not calling for mass demonstrations here or anything - I don't think it's come to that. Just think our fans could look at TF and his leadership a bit more critically (not the same thing as negatively...)

Geng behave. Now your starting to sound like the 12 year old kid your accusing everyone of being. Stop panicking and crying, TF is here to stay whether you like it or not. I suggest you take some prozac and relax.

You would obviously like to protest, maybe you would rather chain yourself to trees and dig tunnels in protest but the fact is, if TF wasn't here we'd be well and truly focked!!!!!

[Hitman34]

Dont have any grudge with "uncle" tony and i dont share any effiliation with him either.

questioning him at this stage is all fair and good and hopfully will keep him honest.

until we start building on warren farm along with building on ooc i will continue to question him and his backers in the boardroom.

[Kevin Mcleod]

Dont have any grudge with "uncle" tony and i dont share any effiliation with him either.

questioning him at this stage is all fair and good and hopfully will keep him honest.

until we start building on warren farm along with building on ooc i will continue to question him and his backers in the boardroom.

Serious question here and i come in peace asking it. Have you any effilaition whatsoever towards any single human being tied to queens park rangers? Seems so strange that you dont appear to warm to anyone whatsoever at the club you say you support. Well maybe apart from some young kids who have never played yet.

[brightonr]

Ok I was conflating banks with "external debts" more generally. Point being that it's all very well saying "our debts are only to our owners!!", which is true, for now. But if something changed tomorrow, we'd still need to cough up 60k for Barton's wages next week. And that money would have to come from somewhere, be it bank loans or whatever. Or we'd just have more debts, but this time it'd be external debts to people and institutions who would eventually call it in.

Think you are getting a bit over wrought my friend.

There are no external debts, other than this new loan.

Question for you. Where would these extra external debts come from? Do you think any institution would lend a business with QPR's track record, a considerable amount of money? The ONLY real assets excluding players are the ground and contractual TV payments. The security of the latter would appear to have been taken up already.

Stop panicking and let TF & co deal with all that stuff. Not suggesting we all roll over like puppies wanting their tummies rubbed, but give them some credit. I think what they have done so far has afforded them that at least.