| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? 19:20 - Sep 15 with 6443 views | BklynRanger |
LFW bonus points should be awarded for any 'accidental' destruction of carefully constructed paper mache mock-ups.
Scoring could be based on creativity, risk of personal injury and amount of devastation caused.
|  | | |  |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:29 - Sep 16 with 1362 views | vblockranger |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:09 - Sep 16 by daveB |
We're going to move from Loftus Road, it will either be Old Oak or if that falls through it will be somewhere else probably further west, big chunk of land where we were going to build a training ground going spare at the moment [Post edited 16 Sep 2014 14:10]
|
Is that the training ground and academy that is vital to the football club? TF been very quiet about that now that it's more vital that the money is used elsewhere. Training ground and academy is needed before the new entertainment complex but they arent going to earn the millions from a new academy. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:32 - Sep 16 with 1358 views | daveB |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:29 - Sep 16 by vblockranger |
Is that the training ground and academy that is vital to the football club? TF been very quiet about that now that it's more vital that the money is used elsewhere. Training ground and academy is needed before the new entertainment complex but they arent going to earn the millions from a new academy. |
he's said plenty on the training ground but not what anyone wants to hear |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:35 - Sep 16 with 1354 views | PinnerPaul |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 13:51 - Sep 16 by simmo |
I am not saying anyone at QPR has accused Car Giant of being that, but that didn't stop the owner getting grief and abuse from QPR fans under the impression he won't sell and allow these plans to go through. That is one of the reasons he wanted to get his side of the story out there. I didn't say they were quotes and don't have a clue what makes more money. [Post edited 16 Sep 2014 13:54]
|
Apologies Simmo it was Jamie who said they were more successful and profitable than QPR. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:42 - Sep 16 with 1340 views | baz_qpr |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 13:03 - Sep 16 by simmo |
From the BBC today
Queens Park Rangers face growing opposition to their new stadium bid with current landowner Cargiant claiming they "will not enter into any future talks with the club".
The former QPR sponsors hold a 30-acre plot on the Old Oak site where the west London club hope to build a new 40,000-seater stadium.
Rangers have support from all the major bodies required to build the new ground as soon as 2018, but Cargiant said in a statement: "We are very surprised by QPR's PR campaign regarding a proposed new stadium in Old Oak Common and in particular on land owned by Cargiant.
"The company are not in negotiations with QPR and will not enter into any future talks with the club."
It is funny how they are involved in an exhibition talking about building a stadium on land they don't own and are not close to owning. Amateur stuff. |
You could not be more wrong.
The area has been decreed for regeneration by the London partnership, the area in question was agreed between the councils and Boris / GLA. Car Giant objected throughout the process to their land inclusion, the objections and the minutes are available online. The number of jobs the land currently serves to its acreage is tiny. Car Giant have lost that part and now they are trying to make sure they are cut into any deal.
The public authorities have invited groups to submit plans, within a timetable they will choose a plan and then go ahead with it. Land holders and most are on board anyway will either sell or be forced to sell. This 100% posturing by Car Giant. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:47 - Sep 16 with 1327 views | BklynRanger |
I haven't listened to the podcast yet, but it seems a bit of an unfortunate risk to decide to put forward your dad's argument on a show that's supposed to be for all QPR supporters. I'm not 100% sure what I'd be doing in Chris Mendes's shoes but my instinct is I'd stay well clear of the whole thing at this moment in time.
As far as the TF/QPR vs Car Giant stuff goes, it looks from the outside like we've made it very easy for Car Giant to set up a David vs Goliath scenario. TF was very confident everything would fall into place after getting support from the mayor or whoever. The problem being that once again the big 'global player' approach doesn't first take meticulous enough account of the local details. | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 18:06 - Sep 16 with 1210 views | BasingstokeR |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:47 - Sep 16 by BklynRanger |
I haven't listened to the podcast yet, but it seems a bit of an unfortunate risk to decide to put forward your dad's argument on a show that's supposed to be for all QPR supporters. I'm not 100% sure what I'd be doing in Chris Mendes's shoes but my instinct is I'd stay well clear of the whole thing at this moment in time.
As far as the TF/QPR vs Car Giant stuff goes, it looks from the outside like we've made it very easy for Car Giant to set up a David vs Goliath scenario. TF was very confident everything would fall into place after getting support from the mayor or whoever. The problem being that once again the big 'global player' approach doesn't first take meticulous enough account of the local details. |
Just had a listen to the Podcast; the Gerry Francis interview is very very good.
Then to add on the Car Giant statement with the 'family element' from Chris just made the whole thing sound / feel very awkward (and for me out a downer on the great Gerry interview) especially being tacked on the end of the show with no discussion. Feel it should've been given time or left out for when there was proper time to discuss. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 19:41 - Sep 16 with 1157 views | daveB |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 18:06 - Sep 16 by BasingstokeR |
Just had a listen to the Podcast; the Gerry Francis interview is very very good.
Then to add on the Car Giant statement with the 'family element' from Chris just made the whole thing sound / feel very awkward (and for me out a downer on the great Gerry interview) especially being tacked on the end of the show with no discussion. Feel it should've been given time or left out for when there was proper time to discuss. |
I think it would have been better if the statement had been released earlier in the day then the guys on the show read it out and discuss it. All felt a bit odd stuck in the middle of a Gerry Francis special, like dropping in a party political broadcast 5 minutes before the end of a good film | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 19:47 - Sep 16 with 1154 views | QPR_Jim |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:00 - Sep 16 by TopCat34 |
Courtesy of Dave Mac on Twitter:
Cargiant aren't 'blocking' Old Oak and the AirAsia Arena. They're looking to relocate and the regeneration will happen. They're simply not party to some kind of agreement or partnership with #QPR & are free to submit own plans, as are others. Nothing more, nothing less.
Didn't know they'd decided a name?  [Post edited 16 Sep 2014 14:01]
|
So, based on the quote from Dave Mac, we're not bullying Car Giant into doing anything, we're just trying to gain support for our proposed scheme which includes a stadium on the regeneration site. Car Giant and any other developer can and probably will do the same for their schemes, so we presumably we won't be the only party proposing something without owning the land. It would seem it's accepted Car Giant are leaving, it's more a case of what will replace them on the site, which appears to be in be largely in the control of the GLA and not Car Giant. If it was purely their Car Giants choice I'm guessing they wouldn't be submitting a proposal.
As long as the new ground is owned by QPR I'm happy to move. I also don't want to stay at LR for another couple of years then still end up getting re-located just further out of London. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 20:00 - Sep 16 with 1145 views | Pablo_Hoopsta |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:42 - Sep 16 by baz_qpr |
You could not be more wrong.
The area has been decreed for regeneration by the London partnership, the area in question was agreed between the councils and Boris / GLA. Car Giant objected throughout the process to their land inclusion, the objections and the minutes are available online. The number of jobs the land currently serves to its acreage is tiny. Car Giant have lost that part and now they are trying to make sure they are cut into any deal.
The public authorities have invited groups to submit plans, within a timetable they will choose a plan and then go ahead with it. Land holders and most are on board anyway will either sell or be forced to sell. This 100% posturing by Car Giant. |
Interesting stuff, thanks for posting that. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 20:03 - Sep 16 with 1142 views | BasingstokeR |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 19:41 - Sep 16 by daveB |
I think it would have been better if the statement had been released earlier in the day then the guys on the show read it out and discuss it. All felt a bit odd stuck in the middle of a Gerry Francis special, like dropping in a party political broadcast 5 minutes before the end of a good film |
Exactly that Dave B! | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 21:26 - Sep 16 with 1086 views | DWQPR |
I am certain that I have read in recent months a quotation from the owner of CG that he had no intention of moving the company and that QPR had made all the assumptions that they would just up and move and that the club had offered a site which to them was inadequate. It seems that this is very much bandwagon jumping by the owners and frankly I still feel that the club has already had the nod from the GLA and the various councils involved.
I also feel that DaveB is spot on with his view on the situation and whether supporters think that TF is either jumping the gun or acting underhand he knows that for the club to grow we have to move and OOC does represent the best opportunity for this to happen. It is about time that supporters started to throw their weight behind what the club wants to achieve rather than whinging and moaning about how they have gone about their business dealings, who they have/haven't signed and what capacity the ground should be. I mean, so what if we don't fill 40,000 initially, what is to say that in time, with a sustained period of top flight football that this cannot be achieved. TF has already said that he wants to bring prices down and make football more affordable, well I for one believe him at his word and welcome what he is trying to achieve and I bloody well hope that he does achieve it. Whatever his shortfalls he is by far the best owner that this football club has had since Jim Gregory and probably including Gregory who always tried to do things on the cheap. | |
| |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 21:27 - Sep 16 with 1085 views | QPR_Jim |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 21:14 - Sep 16 by smegma |
At the 'exhibition ' there's a form to fill out , or what they call "' feedback '.
There are only three questions.
1. Do you agree with our vision for Old Oak?
2. Do you think is the right location for a new QPR stadium ?
3. Would you agree with naming the development New Queens Park ?
The optional answers are yes/ yes-with reservations/ no. |
That sounds like the pretty much same questionnaire that is on the website for the development plans. ( http://www.new-queens-park.co.uk)
I'm not sure I like the sound of New Queens Park. | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 22:13 - Sep 16 with 1040 views | SpiritofGregory |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:04 - Sep 16 by DWQPR |
Although it can also be argued that the likes of TF and the Mittals are far from foolish individuals with the amount of financial success that they have achieved and that they would not do such things unless they have already had the 'nod' for a go ahead for the development. Retaining a f**king great big car lot in a centre of a major infrastructure development might not be the GLA's or the local councils take on making the area more attractive in terms of bringing firms in and residents. Whereas a major new shiny sporting arena complete with huge corporate facilities and the ability to hold major entertainment events, to rival such sites as the O2 will make the regeneration far more attractive an area to bring businesses into and also residents. I mean with regards to bars and restuarants, will chains want to open in a place like OOC if the major entertainment attraction is Bill and his family looking out for a second hand Mondeo? Or as with the O2, you have a huge amount of eateries/bars which do very nicely with the amount of gigs and other events going on there. A stadium will also employ far more people than a car lot.
Cargiant will of course shout and scream from the roof tops and appeal any CPO, but I suspect that everything will happen and that Cargiant will eventually move elsewhere with a huge cheque under their arm and smug faces. Personally I think that it is a done deal. |
Done deal???
We need to deal with the facts. What do we know :
Car Giant own the land and QPR do not.
QPR couldn't even follow through with Warren Farm.
In regards to a CPO it can be followed through if the existing owner does not have other plans for the site. Car Giant have clearly said that they wish to be involved with the redevelopment of the area. If they wish to acquire other partners to produce their own vision for the area they can do so, there will be no shortage of investors.
It's clear that Rangers have offered him a derisory offer. The board have got to realised that we are in London you can't get away with derisory offers especially to a wealthy businessman man who runs a highly successful business. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 22:24 - Sep 16 with 1028 views | SpiritofGregory |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 21:26 - Sep 16 by DWQPR |
I am certain that I have read in recent months a quotation from the owner of CG that he had no intention of moving the company and that QPR had made all the assumptions that they would just up and move and that the club had offered a site which to them was inadequate. It seems that this is very much bandwagon jumping by the owners and frankly I still feel that the club has already had the nod from the GLA and the various councils involved.
I also feel that DaveB is spot on with his view on the situation and whether supporters think that TF is either jumping the gun or acting underhand he knows that for the club to grow we have to move and OOC does represent the best opportunity for this to happen. It is about time that supporters started to throw their weight behind what the club wants to achieve rather than whinging and moaning about how they have gone about their business dealings, who they have/haven't signed and what capacity the ground should be. I mean, so what if we don't fill 40,000 initially, what is to say that in time, with a sustained period of top flight football that this cannot be achieved. TF has already said that he wants to bring prices down and make football more affordable, well I for one believe him at his word and welcome what he is trying to achieve and I bloody well hope that he does achieve it. Whatever his shortfalls he is by far the best owner that this football club has had since Jim Gregory and probably including Gregory who always tried to do things on the cheap. |
I will be popping in (Kensal Rise) on Saturday and voting Yes. No QPR fan is against this the move. | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 22:46 - Sep 16 with 1009 views | DWQPR |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 22:13 - Sep 16 by SpiritofGregory |
Done deal???
We need to deal with the facts. What do we know :
Car Giant own the land and QPR do not.
QPR couldn't even follow through with Warren Farm.
In regards to a CPO it can be followed through if the existing owner does not have other plans for the site. Car Giant have clearly said that they wish to be involved with the redevelopment of the area. If they wish to acquire other partners to produce their own vision for the area they can do so, there will be no shortage of investors.
It's clear that Rangers have offered him a derisory offer. The board have got to realised that we are in London you can't get away with derisory offers especially to a wealthy businessman man who runs a highly successful business. |
However it can also be viewed that a certain part owner of the club, has in the recent past donated such things as a viewing tower at the Olympic Park and a new wing at Great Ormond Street and has been quite philanthropic in London and maybe OOC is the thank you would merit along with encouragement to continue with his generosity. | |
| |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 09:51 - Sep 17 with 926 views | GloryHunter |
Sounds like Car Giant should still be one of our sponsors. Why did this stop - was there a falling out? Might this explain some of the antagonism? |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 09:59 - Sep 17 with 922 views | Northernr |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 09:51 - Sep 17 by GloryHunter |
Sounds like Car Giant should still be one of our sponsors. Why did this stop - was there a falling out? Might this explain some of the antagonism? |
Car Giant sponsored the club when it was skint. They went in to see Paladini to explore how much it would cost and he asked them waht they wanted to pay. They came up with a figure and he immediately said that was fine. They asked if there shouldn't be some sort of contract or terms of agreement written up and Paladini told them to go away and write up the contract themselves and he'd sign it. They went back to the office and wrote some terms on a side of A4 for a three year deal with a break clause each year on Car Giant's side - so effectively they could decide whether to continue for another season or not and QPR had no say. Paladini signed it without looking at it and billed it on the official website as the "biggest sponsorship deal in the club's history".
A couple of times they paid their fee in advance because the club was about to go bust and needed extra cash flow.
When Briatore rocked up after two years Agag went to see them to say "thanks, but we're going in a different direction now..." and they told him he should probably go and have a look at the contract. Cue the traditional Gianni Paladini phone call screaming obscenities...
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:17 - Sep 17 with 881 views | daveB |
ahh Paladini, gone for a few years but his disasters still having a lasting impact on us. | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:18 - Sep 17 with 880 views | stevec |
Not sure any morality tale fits in here, QPR are fighting their corner, Car Giant fighting theirs. Hopefully we win but either way Car Giant are going to do nicely out of this. |  | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:19 - Sep 17 with 876 views | TheBlob |
This is a ridiculous situation and it looks as if the club has painted itself into a corner.That CPO could be a possibility if the council rejected the Car Giant development plans and demanded the New Queen's Park model.If I were Tony I'd be taking members of the planning department out to lavish dinners/front row at Ye Olde Lappe Dancing Club. |  |
| |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:22 - Sep 17 with 872 views | nadera78 |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 21:26 - Sep 16 by DWQPR |
I am certain that I have read in recent months a quotation from the owner of CG that he had no intention of moving the company and that QPR had made all the assumptions that they would just up and move and that the club had offered a site which to them was inadequate. It seems that this is very much bandwagon jumping by the owners and frankly I still feel that the club has already had the nod from the GLA and the various councils involved.
I also feel that DaveB is spot on with his view on the situation and whether supporters think that TF is either jumping the gun or acting underhand he knows that for the club to grow we have to move and OOC does represent the best opportunity for this to happen. It is about time that supporters started to throw their weight behind what the club wants to achieve rather than whinging and moaning about how they have gone about their business dealings, who they have/haven't signed and what capacity the ground should be. I mean, so what if we don't fill 40,000 initially, what is to say that in time, with a sustained period of top flight football that this cannot be achieved. TF has already said that he wants to bring prices down and make football more affordable, well I for one believe him at his word and welcome what he is trying to achieve and I bloody well hope that he does achieve it. Whatever his shortfalls he is by far the best owner that this football club has had since Jim Gregory and probably including Gregory who always tried to do things on the cheap. |
Jim Gregory turned a poorly supported club, with a stadium barely worthy of the name, that had never played in the top flight into one of the best run clubs in the country. TF and Co cannot hold a candle to him, whatever his flaws may have been.
To suggest that we blindly follow TF and Co's plans for a new stadium, without question, is ludicrous. They want to build a new stadium? OK, fair enough, but it has to be one that is suitable for QPR. | | | |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:36 - Sep 17 with 852 views | TheBlob |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 10:22 - Sep 17 by nadera78 |
Jim Gregory turned a poorly supported club, with a stadium barely worthy of the name, that had never played in the top flight into one of the best run clubs in the country. TF and Co cannot hold a candle to him, whatever his flaws may have been.
To suggest that we blindly follow TF and Co's plans for a new stadium, without question, is ludicrous. They want to build a new stadium? OK, fair enough, but it has to be one that is suitable for QPR. |
Actually the "transformation" of LR wasn't really a great undertaking at the time.The money for the SAR stand came from the sale of Rodney Marsh,the rest of the ground stayed virtually the same,including the Ellerslie shit hole.
All right certain other improvements have occurred over the years which prompted an Alan Parry rant about the modernity of LR in a tv precursor to a Newcastle home fixture,saying that real fans get used to waiting 40 minutes for a steak pie.Such reverse snobbery got him the nickname of Meat Pie Parry.
I have to say that all the wonderful things(at the time) Jim Gregory did were not that ground shaking(no pun intended) and very much small beer compared to TF's plans.They in themselves are very similarly small beer in the confines of the footballing world. [Post edited 17 Sep 2014 12:58]
| |
| |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 11:22 - Sep 17 with 824 views | PinnerPaul |
| Anybody been, or going, to the Old Oak 'Exhibition'? on 14:03 - Sep 16 by Northernr |
They own 45 acres and very little of it is to store cars on. They own the commercial units and lock up garages around their site, and to the north of the car giant lots and offices are paint shops, body shops, photo studios and things like that. Then they own a lot of the buildings and offices along the Scrubs lane. Think of them more as clever property people than a used car lot, because they've just acquired it as it's become available over the years when it's been available. |
Thanks Clive, didn't know that.
Went there a few weeks ago, first time in about 4/5 years and it has certainly grown in that time (as the accounts I posted show).
Didn't know that they actually own more than the quite considerable area that IS taken up with cars as well.
As you say they have been very clever in buying up the land. With property market as it is, they would be mad not to do all they can to a) maximise what they get for all the land and b) ensure that their successful business continues.
Sad to say if we had won 5 out of 5 then the "opposition" on here to the clubs plans would be a lot less plus the usual rule on here is that more prefer to post bad/negative things about the club than complimentary/good things | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
