Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Major news - new QPR minority owner

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Major news - new QPR minority owner

    It was announced on the clubs web pages today that we have got a new director, who is also taking an ownership stake in the club. It is a minority stake according the article. The percentage is not mentioned. His name is Richard Reilly.

    Richard Reilly joins QPR board

    Mr Reilly is founder and CEO of RBI Solar. But more interesting is the fact he is co-owner of FC Cincinnati (football) and Cincinnati Reds (basketball).

    With the risk of reading too much into it, this can be a first step of US investors investing in QPR.

  • #2
    Very interesting development and we'l have to see what comes of it. The appointment in itself shows the Board want to grow the business further. With his financial background I'm sure he'll be involved in financing of a new stadium.

    Comment


    • #3
      If it's good for the club, then he's welcome, don't care where he's from as long as he's straight financially, and there's nothing lurking in the shadows that could embarrass us​​​​​

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by KevC59 View Post
        If it's good for the club, then he's welcome, don't care where he's from as long as he's straight financially, and there's nothing lurking in the shadows that could embarrass us​​​​​
        Like organising us a loan from unknown investors based on Panama? As easy as ABC.....

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by SheepRanger View Post
          Very interesting development and we'l have to see what comes of it. The appointment in itself shows the Board want to grow the business further. With his financial background I'm sure he'll be involved in financing of a new stadium.
          A new stadium ? Where
          Football played the Charlie Ferris way

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by superhoop67 View Post

            A new stadium ? Where
            LC Stadium? Didnt the council say they wont give away land on the cheap to overseas multi-millionaire? Perhaps this is a step in getting a consortium together to build a multi-purpose use ground. One option we put together was that we would lease the ground once built by developers. Its looks like a step towards a new stadium.

            Comment


            • #7
              The idea that we lose our current Stadium to then move into one that is leased fills me with unease.

              Despite the general view that puts out that a new Stadium will make the club self sufficient it’s Premiership money in our case that could achieve that imo.

              If this new board member can open up links to promising players in the MLS I would happy.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MINCER View Post
                The idea that we lose our current Stadium to then move into one that is leased fills me with unease.

                Despite the general view that puts out that a new Stadium will make the club self sufficient it’s Premiership money in our case that could achieve that imo.

                If this new board member can open up links to promising players in the MLS I would happy.
                Do we down the stadium now?

                The football side is own by QPR Holdings Ltd and the Stadium is owned by Queens Park Rangers Football & Athletic Club Ltd. Even though the directors are similar legally they are very seperare. If the footbsll club went into administration our owners would still walk away with the ground.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SheepRanger View Post

                  Do we down the stadium now?

                  The football side is own by QPR Holdings Ltd and the Stadium is owned by Queens Park Rangers Football & Athletic Club Ltd. Even though the directors are similar legally they are very seperare. If the footbsll club went into administration our owners would still walk away with the ground.
                  I could be wrong but isn’t there a “covenent” on the ground preventing it being used other than a sports area unless legal agreements are met with the local council ?

                  Would you have no concerns that a similar scenario to the problems that Coventry City faced when leasing ?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MINCER View Post

                    I could be wrong but isn’t there a “covenent” on the ground preventing it being used other than a sports area unless legal agreements are met with the local council ?

                    Would you have no concerns that a similar scenario to the problems that Coventry City faced when leasing ?
                    Yes, there is a covenant and a former director Nick de Marco tried and failed to get it removed through his legal firm. I'm quite happy at the KPFS but I'm only 5"7' and sit with relative comfort. Others cant wait to leave. My point is that through company structures the football club is already renting the ground to a seperate company owned by our directors.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      He might do a runner after todays result !!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SheepRanger View Post

                        Yes, there is a covenant and a former director Nick de Marco tried and failed to get it removed through his legal firm. I'm quite happy at the KPFS but I'm only 5"7' and sit with relative comfort. Others cant wait to leave. My point is that through company structures the football club is already renting the ground to a seperate company owned by our directors.
                        Perhaps I’m being naive but why would the owners transfer ownership of the ground to a separate company and deduct rent from the clubs finances ?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MINCER View Post

                          Perhaps I’m being naive but why would the owners transfer ownership of the ground to a separate company and deduct rent from the clubs finances ?
                          So they can keep the land if the football side goes belly up, or it protects the stadium for longterm football use if the football side goes bust? There may be accountancy benefits from separating the two as well?

                          I doubt there are many football clubs who have new grounds that are under the same umbrella as the football club. Investors may be keen to invest in a multi-purpose stadium who wouldnt want anything to do with investing in a football team...

                          From memory the Coventry situation happened because the same rent was due even when they went down the leagues. They wanted reduced rent which could be increased as they bounced back. I think its normal too that stadium owners get the profits from food and drink sales too.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Fair play You have answered my questions as best you can Sheep but I’m still uneasy on the thought of leaving KPS to perhaps lease another

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MINCER View Post
                              Fair play You have answered my questions as best you can Sheep but I’m still uneasy on the thought of leaving KPS to perhaps lease another
                              Even if our owners put up £300m to build a new stadium I would be amazed if it fell under the same legal structure as football operations. And in reality would be no different to the current situation.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X