| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 13:10 - Mar 17 with 10631 views | QPRDave |
"The club is also bracing itself from a supporters backlash when they learn the inescapable truth QPR will develop raw talent and sell to help balance books."
http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/qpr-slash-playing-bu
Well I don't see how we'll ever sustain a promotion push again running the club along these lines. What with parachute payments even bigger than now.
Now this is QPR that most of us remember so ok fair enough, but don't bullsh*t me with we're ambitious, Jimmy's gonna build a team to get promoted because sell your best players and you have the Richard Thompson era back.
As I say if this is the model, running the club to survive fine, but it's back to being also rans and the only excitement will be relegation battles as it used to be, only we were Prem lge to start off with under Thompson
And what is the point of building a new stadium? |  | | |  |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 19:16 - Mar 20 with 2025 views | isawqpratwcity |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 17:39 - Mar 20 by Ingham |
No. What a Club is worth - or is claimed to be worth - is not the same thing as the price, it is the basis for calculating the price. In practice, it is perfectly possible for all parties to agree a price which is nowhere near what either thinks the Club is worth, depending on any number of factors.
Chris Wright came to believe he had paid more than the Club was worth. That is meaningless if the two amount to the same thing.
To doubt that the Club was worth what he paid makes sense. To doubt that he paid what he paid does not. Once the deal is completed, the price is fixed, done and dusted. But the Club's worth may fluctuate, even for those who imagine its worth exists over and above what various interested parties from time to time believe that worth to be.
And given that, it may very well be that the Club IS worth 'roughly' what has been spent on it. In the event that what was invested corresponded to the value of what it was invested IN.
I know what you're thinking - surely that is hardly possible at QPR. For shame! The money MAY have been wisely spent. It just doesn't seem to be so.
As far as conversion goes, I think it is the effect of conversion on the Club's prospects that is being called into question, not least by supposing that it may not have happened at all (in the event that the debt was written off instead). What the shares are worth may be a matter of opinion, with buyer and seller valuing them differently. Even if what they were worth was the same thing as the price, we have no idea what the price they fetch will be, so that is academic for the time being.
But as far as the percentage of his shareholding is concerned, I'm sure we all understand that if TF has suddenly acquired many more shares than he had before, his percentage shareholding MUST have increased vis a vis his fellow shareholders. Obvious to all. I'd say.
Of course, none of this clears up what he meant when he said the debt was stadium related. Nor what the financial status of the Club might be if it is drawn in to a vast redevelopment programme, the outcome of which, especially long term, is unknown.
Personally, I don't think any of the above qualifies as an 'anti-TF rant', and particularly not where I commend him for writing off the debt (if one or two of the other posters are correct in thinking that this is what he has, in fact, done). |
I can assure you that you don't know what I am thinking, because you wouldn't be happy if you did. I think you are talking bollox; long-winded, ill-founded, self-serving bollox.
The club is 'worth' roughly what it sells for. It doesn't have to be exactly equal. Lots of people complain about paying too much, or gloat about a bargain, but only because one party or other miscalculated what the item was worth at the time. It happens.
What was spent on the club by Fernandes and co has had virtually no effect on the value of the club. That is why a prospective purchaser will laugh if he is told he is expected to recompense them for their ill-judged contributions.
And it doesn't matter what the shares are worth, it matters what the club is worth. You pay for the club, you get the shares.
Do you pay attention to what Fernandes says? He was talking about two different debts: the money that had been contributed by him and his co-owner mates to buy and pay players (which has been converted to shares); and then the other debt, 17 million from memory, which was stadium related, owed to an outside party, still outstanding but to be paid back by next year (again, from memory).
And the reason why I suggested you were having an anti-TF rant is because you seem to delight in being deliberately obtuse in understanding the process here. You still continue to use mealy-mouthed, sceptical statements like "I commend him for writing off the debt (if one or two of the other posters are correct in thinking that this is what he has, in fact, done)." |  |
| |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:04 - Mar 20 with 1963 views | CiderwithRsie |
Well, by definition, anything is only worth what someone will pay for it. See Charlie Austin for an example. |  | | |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:10 - Mar 20 with 1946 views | QPRDave |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 19:16 - Mar 20 by isawqpratwcity |
I can assure you that you don't know what I am thinking, because you wouldn't be happy if you did. I think you are talking bollox; long-winded, ill-founded, self-serving bollox.
The club is 'worth' roughly what it sells for. It doesn't have to be exactly equal. Lots of people complain about paying too much, or gloat about a bargain, but only because one party or other miscalculated what the item was worth at the time. It happens.
What was spent on the club by Fernandes and co has had virtually no effect on the value of the club. That is why a prospective purchaser will laugh if he is told he is expected to recompense them for their ill-judged contributions.
And it doesn't matter what the shares are worth, it matters what the club is worth. You pay for the club, you get the shares.
Do you pay attention to what Fernandes says? He was talking about two different debts: the money that had been contributed by him and his co-owner mates to buy and pay players (which has been converted to shares); and then the other debt, 17 million from memory, which was stadium related, owed to an outside party, still outstanding but to be paid back by next year (again, from memory).
And the reason why I suggested you were having an anti-TF rant is because you seem to delight in being deliberately obtuse in understanding the process here. You still continue to use mealy-mouthed, sceptical statements like "I commend him for writing off the debt (if one or two of the other posters are correct in thinking that this is what he has, in fact, done)." |
Hmm I wonder whether this is the "courtesy you'd expect down the pub" I was told about | | | |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:58 - Mar 20 with 1916 views | PunteR |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:10 - Mar 20 by QPRDave |
Hmm I wonder whether this is the "courtesy you'd expect down the pub" I was told about |
see,there you go again. on a wind up.
I said "normal courtesy" after you said there are LFW "rules". |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 (n/t) on 23:10 - Mar 20 with 1906 views | connell10 |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:10 - Mar 20 by QPRDave |
Hmm I wonder whether this is the "courtesy you'd expect down the pub" I was told about |
[Post edited 21 Mar 2016 0:08]
|  |
| AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!! | | Poll: | best number 10 ever? |
| |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 08:29 - Mar 21 with 1806 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 13:50 - Mar 17 by Northernr |
Thread completely ignoring that the more expensive players we've got rid of this year, the better the team has got. Far, far better now than we were with sandro, fer, green etc in the team.
Also completely ignores that Burnley are quite happily about to get promoted again, operating on a fraction of the budget we run on.
Said it for ages, if you try and buy big money players when you're a club lie us you get the wrong sort of players and you go nowhere. The best season we've had since Holloway was here was the one where we signed Derry, Hill, Kenny, Mackie, Smith and Hulse for about £3m combined.
And even if none of that were true, do we want to bankrupt our club trying to get it to the Premier League? No ta. |
Damn, it's a shame I cannot upvote this comment anymore than I already have done. My sentiments exactly. Alot of us need reality checks after the madness of the last few years of Tony spunking millions on dross, and even the Flavio era before him with his 4 year plan bollox. |  | | |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 10:15 - Mar 21 with 1760 views | adhoc_qpr |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 08:29 - Mar 21 by Orthodox_Hoop |
Damn, it's a shame I cannot upvote this comment anymore than I already have done. My sentiments exactly. Alot of us need reality checks after the madness of the last few years of Tony spunking millions on dross, and even the Flavio era before him with his 4 year plan bollox. |
Exactly, we need to be signing the developing the right kind of players with the right kind of character!
Seb Polter may not have been wise to tweet his frustration at being frozen out by Ramsey earlier in the season - but at least it showed he was desperate to play and passionate, unlike Traore etc.
With a few careful additions this team should be capable of being in the mix next season (meaning with a chance of making the playoffs come the business end of the season) and they'll also be much easier to support and cheer on. | | | |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 13:47 - Mar 21 with 1689 views | QPRDave |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:58 - Mar 20 by PunteR |
see,there you go again. on a wind up.
I said "normal courtesy" after you said there are LFW "rules". |
why is that a windup?.. I can see you are trying to wind me up with your patronising way of telling me what I can and can't post.
Along with your little puppy connell there obviously having a comment but then not having the balls to leave it up. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 13:50 - Mar 21 with 1681 views | TheBlob |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 22:04 - Mar 20 by CiderwithRsie |
Well, by definition, anything is only worth what someone will pay for it. See Charlie Austin for an example. |
Precisely.And it's very much a buyers' market. |  |
| |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 16:16 - Mar 21 with 1618 views | PunteR |
| Playing budget slashed by a 1/3 on 13:47 - Mar 21 by QPRDave |
why is that a windup?.. I can see you are trying to wind me up with your patronising way of telling me what I can and can't post.
Along with your little puppy connell there obviously having a comment but then not having the balls to leave it up. |
Because you took what I said out of context to have a dig at isaw. | |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
