| Ariel Borysiuk gone 14:41 - Jan 25 with 9930 views | Bakes |
Gone by mutual |  |
| With Faith And Courage Comes Glory |
| |  |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 14:49 - Jan 25 with 6026 views | qprd |
Players under contract who we couldn't sell/loan, but could only be released through mutual consent in the last 18 months:
-Daniel Toszer
-Michael Petrasso
-Steven Caulker
-Nasser El Khayati
-Reece Grego Cox
-Ariel Borysiuk
Kind of sad we couldn't recoup anything from these players |  | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 14:58 - Jan 25 with 5977 views | superhoopdownunder |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 14:49 - Jan 25 by qprd |
Players under contract who we couldn't sell/loan, but could only be released through mutual consent in the last 18 months:
-Daniel Toszer
-Michael Petrasso
-Steven Caulker
-Nasser El Khayati
-Reece Grego Cox
-Ariel Borysiuk
Kind of sad we couldn't recoup anything from these players |
just shows our recruitment generally has been rubbish (with a few exceptions) before the last 2 transfer windows when Holloway joined us and Penrice offered advice
Hopefully continues to improve over the coming transfer windows | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:00 - Jan 25 with 5956 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 14:49 - Jan 25 by qprd |
Players under contract who we couldn't sell/loan, but could only be released through mutual consent in the last 18 months:
-Daniel Toszer
-Michael Petrasso
-Steven Caulker
-Nasser El Khayati
-Reece Grego Cox
-Ariel Borysiuk
Kind of sad we couldn't recoup anything from these players |
Maybe the mutual consent thing we've seen a lot this month is that they get paid the remainder of their contracts at a future date? Would make sense for FFP reasons. |  |
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:02 - Jan 25 with 5940 views | paulparker |
Only QPR could sign the one Pole who couldn't settle in West London |  |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:03 - Jan 25 with 5935 views | Mick_S |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:02 - Jan 25 by paulparker |
Only QPR could sign the one Pole who couldn't settle in West London |
It's the other one I'm bothered about. |  |
| Did I ever mention that I was in Minder? |
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:03 - Jan 25 with 5930 views | stevec |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 14:49 - Jan 25 by qprd |
Players under contract who we couldn't sell/loan, but could only be released through mutual consent in the last 18 months:
-Daniel Toszer
-Michael Petrasso
-Steven Caulker
-Nasser El Khayati
-Reece Grego Cox
-Ariel Borysiuk
Kind of sad we couldn't recoup anything from these players |
Caulker has been well documented but you wonder what kind of wages we were paying to the likes of the other 5 you mention, that mutual consent was the only way we could get them off the books.
Those 5 should have been kissing the clubs árse to get any sort of contract here. |  | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:04 - Jan 25 with 5928 views | vegasranger |
I remember some Polish lads telling us just how poor Ariel was. Only seemed to play decent in friendlies when the game wasn't full paced. You can add Lynch and Perch to the list when you consider we paid a reported 2 million for the paid of them !! [Post edited 25 Jan 2018 15:06]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:16 - Jan 25 with 5853 views | qprd |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:00 - Jan 25 by CliveWilsonSaid |
Maybe the mutual consent thing we've seen a lot this month is that they get paid the remainder of their contracts at a future date? Would make sense for FFP reasons. |
I don't think its for FFP reasons. These kinds of accounting tricks don't fool the FA (see QPR's write off of shareholder loans or Man City's related party revenues with companies related to their owners like Ethiad)
I'm just speculating, but in most of these cases, the players agreed to terminate their contract only once another team was willing to sign them without having to pay a transfer fee: Petrasso went to Montreal, RGC to Woking, Tozser to Debrecen, NEK to Den Haag and Caulker to the pub. It makes sense- why would a player otherwise walk away from a contract that entitles him to money?
Common sense suggests that that we basically paid all these players higher wages than anyone else was willing to pay them. Montreal clearly wanted Petrasso, Den Haag wanted Khayati, but not at the wages we were paying....
Again, i'm speculating, but here's how it would work from a contract perspective.
Imagine that QPR pays Petrasso 20k a week. Montreal wants him, but is only willing to pay 15k a week. Montreal is unwilling to buy him from QPR b/c they don't want to assume the 20k/week wages under contract, and obviously wouldn't pay a transfer fee. Petrasso wants playing time, but he also doesn't want to walk away from that extra 5k he is owed per week.
So QPR terminates the contract, and agrees to make a one-time lump sum payment to Petrasso so that he retains that 5k a week he would otherwise lose by terminating the contract and signing with Montreal.
Montreal is happy b/c they get him at 15k-a-week valuation
Petrasso is happy b/c he gets playing time and is no worse off financial
QPR is somewhat happy b/c they get some wage relief, but unfortunately have to pay out that 5k difference
I guarantee Borysiuk will sign a deal with another team within the week
The reason we may be unable to terminate JET is b/c no team will want his fat as*s... from his perspective, he'd rather just stay with the club and continue collecting until his contract expires | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:26 - Jan 25 with 5782 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:03 - Jan 25 by stevec |
Caulker has been well documented but you wonder what kind of wages we were paying to the likes of the other 5 you mention, that mutual consent was the only way we could get them off the books.
Those 5 should have been kissing the clubs árse to get any sort of contract here. |
Of those, possibly only Toszer would have been on much of a wedge other than SC of course.
Mutual consent will just mean they've come to an arrangement - as someone above says, a lump sum that is likely less than the total cost of the remainder of their contract. It'll be money saving, but probably not a lot.
Don't understand the last sentence. |  |
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:36 - Jan 25 with 5732 views | smegma |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:04 - Jan 25 by vegasranger |
I remember some Polish lads telling us just how poor Ariel was. Only seemed to play decent in friendlies when the game wasn't full paced. You can add Lynch and Perch to the list when you consider we paid a reported 2 million for the paid of them !! [Post edited 25 Jan 2018 15:06]
|
I have to agree. I think the club realised their mistake and went out and signed Scowen instead. In his 4 under 23 games this season he has been the invisible man. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:56 - Jan 25 with 5641 views | stevec |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:26 - Jan 25 by Antti_Heinola |
Of those, possibly only Toszer would have been on much of a wedge other than SC of course.
Mutual consent will just mean they've come to an arrangement - as someone above says, a lump sum that is likely less than the total cost of the remainder of their contract. It'll be money saving, but probably not a lot.
Don't understand the last sentence. |
Well they were all on enough of a wedge that nobody else wanted to pay them as much as we do.
Regards the last sentence, the club needs to start selling itself rather than the bloody pay packet. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:03 - Jan 25 with 5610 views | VancouverHoop |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:16 - Jan 25 by qprd |
I don't think its for FFP reasons. These kinds of accounting tricks don't fool the FA (see QPR's write off of shareholder loans or Man City's related party revenues with companies related to their owners like Ethiad)
I'm just speculating, but in most of these cases, the players agreed to terminate their contract only once another team was willing to sign them without having to pay a transfer fee: Petrasso went to Montreal, RGC to Woking, Tozser to Debrecen, NEK to Den Haag and Caulker to the pub. It makes sense- why would a player otherwise walk away from a contract that entitles him to money?
Common sense suggests that that we basically paid all these players higher wages than anyone else was willing to pay them. Montreal clearly wanted Petrasso, Den Haag wanted Khayati, but not at the wages we were paying....
Again, i'm speculating, but here's how it would work from a contract perspective.
Imagine that QPR pays Petrasso 20k a week. Montreal wants him, but is only willing to pay 15k a week. Montreal is unwilling to buy him from QPR b/c they don't want to assume the 20k/week wages under contract, and obviously wouldn't pay a transfer fee. Petrasso wants playing time, but he also doesn't want to walk away from that extra 5k he is owed per week.
So QPR terminates the contract, and agrees to make a one-time lump sum payment to Petrasso so that he retains that 5k a week he would otherwise lose by terminating the contract and signing with Montreal.
Montreal is happy b/c they get him at 15k-a-week valuation
Petrasso is happy b/c he gets playing time and is no worse off financial
QPR is somewhat happy b/c they get some wage relief, but unfortunately have to pay out that 5k difference
I guarantee Borysiuk will sign a deal with another team within the week
The reason we may be unable to terminate JET is b/c no team will want his fat as*s... from his perspective, he'd rather just stay with the club and continue collecting until his contract expires |
Petrasso will be on nothing like £15k per week in Montréal. MLS has a hard salary cap. All players (except four designated per team, usually well known imports) are paid under US$400,000 per season. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:21 - Jan 25 with 5554 views | enfieldargh |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:03 - Jan 25 by VancouverHoop |
Petrasso will be on nothing like £15k per week in Montréal. MLS has a hard salary cap. All players (except four designated per team, usually well known imports) are paid under US$400,000 per season. |
400,000 per season, the poor dears |  |
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:46 - Jan 25 with 5458 views | daveB |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 14:49 - Jan 25 by qprd |
Players under contract who we couldn't sell/loan, but could only be released through mutual consent in the last 18 months:
-Daniel Toszer
-Michael Petrasso
-Steven Caulker
-Nasser El Khayati
-Reece Grego Cox
-Ariel Borysiuk
Kind of sad we couldn't recoup anything from these players |
compare that to the number we had to pay off in the 3 years before and it doesn't look so bad, your list has 2 kids on from the youth team and 1 player signed in the prem days. Things are improving
The 3 years before that we had to pay off the likes of
SWP
Luke Young
Joey Barton
Traore
Andy Johnson
Zamora
Rob Green
Diakitie
Park Ji-Sung
Hoilett
Mbia
Bosingwa
DJ Campbell
Anton Ferdinand
Julio Cesar
Adel Taarabt |  | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:50 - Jan 25 with 5437 views | Northernr |
- Good that we're getting people out of the door and reducing the size of the squad.
- Bad, whichever way you slice it, that we're still having to pay people to leave. Particularly this one, who was signed recently under the new "buy lower leagues and from Europe, buy with sell on value" ethos with this DOF, CEO and set up.
- Really hoping we are simply reducing our massively oversized squad because it's massively oversized, and not just scrambling people out of the door because we're about to bust FFP limits again. |  | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:55 - Jan 25 with 5410 views | QPR_John |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:50 - Jan 25 by Northernr |
- Good that we're getting people out of the door and reducing the size of the squad.
- Bad, whichever way you slice it, that we're still having to pay people to leave. Particularly this one, who was signed recently under the new "buy lower leagues and from Europe, buy with sell on value" ethos with this DOF, CEO and set up.
- Really hoping we are simply reducing our massively oversized squad because it's massively oversized, and not just scrambling people out of the door because we're about to bust FFP limits again. |
I know I have asked this before but how can we be about to bust FFP. If getting rid of players is becuase of FFP it can only be on wages but surely we have already been penalised for those contracts. Even the FL cannot fine us for honouring contracts. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:02 - Jan 25 with 5377 views | Northernr |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 16:55 - Jan 25 by QPR_John |
I know I have asked this before but how can we be about to bust FFP. If getting rid of players is becuase of FFP it can only be on wages but surely we have already been penalised for those contracts. Even the FL cannot fine us for honouring contracts. |
Of course they can. Wages are the main reason we bust it last time. Don't commit yourself to such ridiculous contracts.
Here is how and why QPR in its current form will always be in danger of breaching these rules (rough figures).
The new rule says you can lose £37m over three years, and we're in year three now since our relegation.
We've had the results for year one and year two should be due shortly. In year one we got the maximum parachute payment (£30mish), we sold Charlie Austin for £4m and we got £10m from Raheem Sterling transfer. We still lost £11m. That leaves us £26m to lose over two seasons.
In the second season the parachute payment went down to £20m, and obviously no Sterling money and no Austin money, so £24m less cash coming in straight away.
Third season is this season, parachute payment down to £10m, no Austin, no Sterling, so £34m less cash then we got in year one.
Hoos has explained previously that to maintain Loftus Road, Harlington, the youth team site at the Concorde Club, rent the dome at Cranford etc costs us up to £9m a season. Our season ticket revenue is £5.6m. Our ticket revenue doesn't even cover running the club before a single salary is paid.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:09 - Jan 25 with 5335 views | TacticalR |
So are we are going to end up in a tent under Hammersmith flyover? |  |
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:20 - Jan 25 with 5284 views | Ashdown_Ranger |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:16 - Jan 25 by qprd |
I don't think its for FFP reasons. These kinds of accounting tricks don't fool the FA (see QPR's write off of shareholder loans or Man City's related party revenues with companies related to their owners like Ethiad)
I'm just speculating, but in most of these cases, the players agreed to terminate their contract only once another team was willing to sign them without having to pay a transfer fee: Petrasso went to Montreal, RGC to Woking, Tozser to Debrecen, NEK to Den Haag and Caulker to the pub. It makes sense- why would a player otherwise walk away from a contract that entitles him to money?
Common sense suggests that that we basically paid all these players higher wages than anyone else was willing to pay them. Montreal clearly wanted Petrasso, Den Haag wanted Khayati, but not at the wages we were paying....
Again, i'm speculating, but here's how it would work from a contract perspective.
Imagine that QPR pays Petrasso 20k a week. Montreal wants him, but is only willing to pay 15k a week. Montreal is unwilling to buy him from QPR b/c they don't want to assume the 20k/week wages under contract, and obviously wouldn't pay a transfer fee. Petrasso wants playing time, but he also doesn't want to walk away from that extra 5k he is owed per week.
So QPR terminates the contract, and agrees to make a one-time lump sum payment to Petrasso so that he retains that 5k a week he would otherwise lose by terminating the contract and signing with Montreal.
Montreal is happy b/c they get him at 15k-a-week valuation
Petrasso is happy b/c he gets playing time and is no worse off financial
QPR is somewhat happy b/c they get some wage relief, but unfortunately have to pay out that 5k difference
I guarantee Borysiuk will sign a deal with another team within the week
The reason we may be unable to terminate JET is b/c no team will want his fat as*s... from his perspective, he'd rather just stay with the club and continue collecting until his contract expires |
"The reason we may be unable to terminate JET is b/c no team will want his fat as*s..."
 [Post edited 25 Jan 2018 17:27]
|  | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:23 - Jan 25 with 5266 views | PinnerPaul |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:02 - Jan 25 by Northernr |
Of course they can. Wages are the main reason we bust it last time. Don't commit yourself to such ridiculous contracts.
Here is how and why QPR in its current form will always be in danger of breaching these rules (rough figures).
The new rule says you can lose £37m over three years, and we're in year three now since our relegation.
We've had the results for year one and year two should be due shortly. In year one we got the maximum parachute payment (£30mish), we sold Charlie Austin for £4m and we got £10m from Raheem Sterling transfer. We still lost £11m. That leaves us £26m to lose over two seasons.
In the second season the parachute payment went down to £20m, and obviously no Sterling money and no Austin money, so £24m less cash coming in straight away.
Third season is this season, parachute payment down to £10m, no Austin, no Sterling, so £34m less cash then we got in year one.
Hoos has explained previously that to maintain Loftus Road, Harlington, the youth team site at the Concorde Club, rent the dome at Cranford etc costs us up to £9m a season. Our season ticket revenue is £5.6m. Our ticket revenue doesn't even cover running the club before a single salary is paid.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
The missing income figures in there are sponsorship, commercial agreements.
You wouldn't expect them to change much years 1,2 and 3 though I have to say. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:24 - Jan 25 with 5257 views | QPR_John |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:02 - Jan 25 by Northernr |
Of course they can. Wages are the main reason we bust it last time. Don't commit yourself to such ridiculous contracts.
Here is how and why QPR in its current form will always be in danger of breaching these rules (rough figures).
The new rule says you can lose £37m over three years, and we're in year three now since our relegation.
We've had the results for year one and year two should be due shortly. In year one we got the maximum parachute payment (£30mish), we sold Charlie Austin for £4m and we got £10m from Raheem Sterling transfer. We still lost £11m. That leaves us £26m to lose over two seasons.
In the second season the parachute payment went down to £20m, and obviously no Sterling money and no Austin money, so £24m less cash coming in straight away.
Third season is this season, parachute payment down to £10m, no Austin, no Sterling, so £34m less cash then we got in year one.
Hoos has explained previously that to maintain Loftus Road, Harlington, the youth team site at the Concorde Club, rent the dome at Cranford etc costs us up to £9m a season. Our season ticket revenue is £5.6m. Our ticket revenue doesn't even cover running the club before a single salary is paid.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
You paint a picture that suggests we can never pass FFP rules which begs the question why carry on. Now I can see how the FL can bring in rules about signing contracts and punish clubs for so doing. But those contracts are legally binding and however much they may like to think that they are the football authorities are not above the law. Punish clubs for signing contracts and include in that punishment a factor for the continuing wage bill by all means but that should be the end you should not be punished for obeying contract law. Being punished more than once for the same offence is a little harsh. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 18:55 - Jan 25 with 5039 views | Northernr |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 17:24 - Jan 25 by QPR_John |
You paint a picture that suggests we can never pass FFP rules which begs the question why carry on. Now I can see how the FL can bring in rules about signing contracts and punish clubs for so doing. But those contracts are legally binding and however much they may like to think that they are the football authorities are not above the law. Punish clubs for signing contracts and include in that punishment a factor for the continuing wage bill by all means but that should be the end you should not be punished for obeying contract law. Being punished more than once for the same offence is a little harsh. |
Of course we can pass them, but you don't do it paying the wages we've paid to the amount of players we've been paying them. Even this season, after great improvements over previous years, we've got 30+ players pulling a senior salary.
Barnsley, Preston etc qualify with lower gates and lower ticket prices and in Preston's case a better team than us. Huddersfield got promoted with no parachute money, lower ticket prices.
It's tougher for QPR because of the situation with the stadium, and the rent paid toward two and a bit training grounds, but it's not impossible. | | | |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 20:04 - Jan 25 with 4837 views | Lblock |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 15:04 - Jan 25 by vegasranger |
I remember some Polish lads telling us just how poor Ariel was. Only seemed to play decent in friendlies when the game wasn't full paced. You can add Lynch and Perch to the list when you consider we paid a reported 2 million for the paid of them !! [Post edited 25 Jan 2018 15:06]
|
Really? I thought when he arrived Ariel got a great reception |  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 20:05 - Jan 25 with 4832 views | QPR_John |
| Ariel Borysiuk gone on 18:55 - Jan 25 by Northernr |
Of course we can pass them, but you don't do it paying the wages we've paid to the amount of players we've been paying them. Even this season, after great improvements over previous years, we've got 30+ players pulling a senior salary.
Barnsley, Preston etc qualify with lower gates and lower ticket prices and in Preston's case a better team than us. Huddersfield got promoted with no parachute money, lower ticket prices.
It's tougher for QPR because of the situation with the stadium, and the rent paid toward two and a bit training grounds, but it's not impossible. |
I appreciate what you are saying but the wages we are paying are a result of the contracts. Once these contracts run out we hopefully will be paying wages relevant to our position but we cannot duck out of these contracts and the FL having punished us for these contracts cannot continue to punish us for something we cannot escape from. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
