| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't 22:15 - Mar 28 with 19810 views | W5R |
There was a meeting a few days ago I learnt this evening. OOC is looking highly unlikely so the club have requested to look at the land opposite Diageo..pizza hut, cinema, where Zenith was etc and also in Greenford (Glaxo etc)
Warren Farm looks shaky but the council is still hopeful of something.
"Sauce" Ealing councillors, Ealing MPs, Ealing prospective MPs and the Labour candidate for Mayor of London.
Personally be fine with the Park Royal site..less of sh*t hole than OOC and well, we did use to play there. |  | | |  |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 12:30 - Apr 2 with 1731 views | Jamie |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 11:26 - Apr 2 by kensalriser |
Not taking issue with the assertion that TF is not the major shareholder then? Seem to remember you were quite vocal about that the other week. |
You've imagined that. |  | | |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 12:43 - Apr 2 with 1706 views | BasingstokeR |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 12:17 - Apr 2 by whittocksRs |
Any major change in ownership — 33% to 10% is definitely that — would need to be followed by notification to any other shareholders, even at a private company. Any shareholders on here able to confirm what's going on? |
My Dad says that apart from a letter that went out near to ShareHolders when TF took over, they haven't had any communications in the last two or so years. |  | | |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 12:50 - Apr 2 with 1701 views | whittocksRs |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 12:43 - Apr 2 by BasingstokeR |
My Dad says that apart from a letter that went out near to ShareHolders when TF took over, they haven't had any communications in the last two or so years. |
Another bad sign then :( | | | |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 13:32 - Apr 2 with 1619 views | SpiritofGregory |
If Mittal has reduced his shareholding then who can blame him. There have been rumours on this messageboard in the past that he was alarmed at our transfer policy.
Why should he pump money into the club if his hands are tied at board level and the club adopts a crazy transfer policy?
He tried to buy the club lock, stock and barrel for a reasonable amount then Tune Group came along just before the transfer window shut and offered over the odds for a club that was a dead cert for relegation with no training ground, an outdated stadium, crap academy etc. Mittal didn't get to being a multi billionaire by being naive.
What is Fernandes going to do if OOC fails, is he going to bankroll a new stadium, will they build flats on Loftus Rd to pay for it, who knows? We have major unanswered questions hanging over the club, which seems odd for a chairman who is seen by the fans as being transparent and open. |  | | |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 13:58 - Apr 2 with 1568 views | Jamie |
Not sure what relevance pointing out that TF is comfortably the wealthiest member of the Tune Group has to do with your initial question. | | | |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 16:09 - Apr 2 with 1469 views | ranger08 |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 13:32 - Apr 2 by SpiritofGregory |
If Mittal has reduced his shareholding then who can blame him. There have been rumours on this messageboard in the past that he was alarmed at our transfer policy.
Why should he pump money into the club if his hands are tied at board level and the club adopts a crazy transfer policy?
He tried to buy the club lock, stock and barrel for a reasonable amount then Tune Group came along just before the transfer window shut and offered over the odds for a club that was a dead cert for relegation with no training ground, an outdated stadium, crap academy etc. Mittal didn't get to being a multi billionaire by being naive.
What is Fernandes going to do if OOC fails, is he going to bankroll a new stadium, will they build flats on Loftus Rd to pay for it, who knows? We have major unanswered questions hanging over the club, which seems odd for a chairman who is seen by the fans as being transparent and open. |
Theres "Transparent and open" & then theres "Tony Fernandes Transparent and open"!!!
BIG difference between the 2! | | | |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 17:33 - Apr 2 with 1413 views | BostonR |
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 01:15 - Apr 1 by Ingham |
Surely Spencer's role delivering the Arsenal stadium points up where, exactly, the flaw in this project lies, Boston.
Not sure whether Arsenal WILL actually own their stadium, but QPR won't own the Old Oak one, not if the original proposals are anything to go by. Arsenal's debt suggests that Arsenal will pay for theirs, so, presumably, QPR will pay for this one if it went ahead, and any Fernandes or Mittal inspired alternative if it doesn't.
Pay for it without owning it. A wonderful deal for the beneficiaries of whatever vast sums the Club has to lay out to fund the project. The pals or business associates of Mittal and Fernandes, I assume, if it is not Mittal and Fernandes themselves.
Lovely. But not for QPR. Interesting that the people who are supposed to REPRESENT QPR - to be acting on the Club's behalf - are actually proposing to use the Club's money to set someone else up for life.
And that is only the half. If Arsenal is a suitable model, where is the QPR equivalent of Arsenal's 60,000 supporters? They knew they had that many before the stadium was built (45,000 season tickets, 15,000 on the waiting list).
Do we have 12-17,000 on the waiting list? Even if we could believe what these people tell us - the Champions League from Bhatia, 'world class talent' from Fernandes, 45,000 and then 40,000 from Beard and now 30-35,000 from Fernandes, where is the 30,000 guaranteed support even at the lowest of their ever decreasing capacities?
Arsenal didn't just move in on the basis that some people thought they might get that many in one of their better years. The supporter was already there, lining up to buy tickets already.
Fernandes and Mittal guarantee someone else the Club's money, but guarantee the Club nothing. Except another colossal debt on top of what we have. Beard estimated that stadium would cost £200 million. Fernandes said something about 'the debt' being stadium related, but quite apart from the sheer untrustworthiness of this regime on the matter - I'm thinking of 'debt-free' from Bhatia - the existing £178 million of losses represents money which is already gone - and lost - on players who weren't worth the money in the first place, not a debt which can be secured against a stadium that hasn't even been built, let alone paid for.
So he can't mean that our present debt is secured against the NEW stadium, surely? Because another £200 million will be required to build the damn thing, whether it is at Old Oak or elsewhere.
And unlike Arsenal, the Club will have no reasonable expectation of ANY income over and above what it gets now on a regular basis. Arsenal had the track record to attract more than they were getting, as well as the waiting list applications, with league successes in almost every decade since 1930, and several under their present manager, and a constant presence in the Champions League.
No wonder they're keen to have QPR around. If they can shove us out of Loftus Road, to run up another £200 million debt on top of the Club's already massive losses under a regime that has set all time Premiership records for failure, without increasing our support, without offering QPR ANYTHING AT ALL except someone else's pitch to play on ...
... they're laughing, alongside all those who are laughing at QPR because we're lumbered with them, and with paying for every costly error of judgement Fernandes & Co make.
It certainly looks like a smooth and profitable deal for someone, perhaps for everyone else, Boston, don't you think?
But what is there in the deal for QPR except an endless nightmare? |
Interesting review but in my experience it all comes down to deal that can be made. This re-generation project will cost billions and from a pure property perspective the yields could be very high . Forget about £200M here or there this businees proposition could seriously be in the multi-billions bracket. Make that work and you could produce a tidy sum to fund a football club. I would fully expect TF and his partners to be "bullying" to get a seat at the table. Let's see what develops if you pardon the pun. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| OOC is OFF but a new stadium isn't on 18:22 - Apr 2 with 1384 views | derbyhoop |
It smacks of Pride Park all over again. Derby we're going to go, then they weren't, then they were, then they weren't. Although PP was mostly contaminated railway land, there wasn't a major private landowner with their own plans.
From a Gtr Londondon perspective, a stadium could act as a catalyst for wider regeneration. But QPRs tactics don't seem the best. |  |
| Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
