| Linford Christie Stadium. 18:04 - Aug 9 with 122785 views | ted_hendrix |
That's where our new ground will be. |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |  |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:28 - Oct 29 with 2139 views | LazyFan |
This is a classic case of using 3rd parties to represent you. Or as it used to be called outsourcing. Don't do it.
Do, it yourself always if you can and get it under control or expect many many many things to go wrong. once you give away control you lose quality.
Now it's public, perhaps they can move forward. They should also not only sack the 3rd party but take them to court as a lesson to anyone else who wants to "manage the client" (council). |  |
| |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:32 - Oct 29 with 2118 views | ParkRoyalR |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:24 - Oct 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
In terms of opportunity, we are at the back of the queue.
We bring neither money nor facilities to the area in truth. Any revenue the 12,000 of us bring on a matchday for an hour and a half to 3 hours is offset by congestion and disruption the matches bring to transport, police, and road closures.
Imagine council tax revenues 1,000 new homes would bring for example. Or Westfield.
I want a stadium there but the directors need to be realistic, however I also acknowledge these guys aren't billionaires because they have provided local facilities everywhere they lay their hat. |
Some things are more important than 'revenue opportunities' and a community football club of a 100+ years standing is one of these things (imo).
My take on our owners is that they seem a very decent bunch and have stood by their mistakes and us when they could have baled out. The club do great work in the community as do the owners at a low-key grass-roots level.
Just a shame imo that H&F hav'nt tried to develop a relationship with them and instead chose to play the Earls Court redevelopment / foreign ownership narrative which did'nt apply in this case. |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:35 - Oct 29 with 2108 views | PinnerPaul |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 13:16 - Oct 29 by NewBee |
Speaking as an outside observer, surely the "foreign owners" reference is explained as follows.
QPR appear to be asking LBH&F to gift them the land at LCS (on the basis that they risk losing QPR to the Borough if they don't?).
Now let us suppose that the land is worth, say, £30m(?) for development purposes. Then QPR build a stadium on it for £100m(?).
It would then be open to the owners to accept any offer over £100m from a new buyer and they'd still make a profit (though the whole venture would likely fetch more than £130m).
Meaning the whole of the £30m value of the site would effectively have been lost to LBH&F and remember, it doesn't belong to the Council, it belongs to the people who live within the Borough.
Now let us consider if QPR were owned eg by your supporters, or some other local Community Trust. In those circumstances, the £30m value of the land at LCS could be argued to be staying within the Borough, albeit indirectly.
Moreover, such owners would be far less likely to want to expoit the club for their own personal gain (asset-stripping, redevelopment, sale to some Saudi mass murderer etc).
To take a comparison (I know, I know), but LB Hounslow were generally pretty helpful to BFC, not least because they knew that local man Matthew Benham had the best long-term interests of the club at heart. Also they didn't have to contribute to the cost of the project, while it brought in 1,000 new homes to a brownfield industrial site/Griffin Park.
Of course, QPR fans might argue that your owners are similarly well-disposed towards the club and the area.
But LBH&F aren't in the business of relying on such sentiment, esp when there are so many other foreign vultures hovering around English football clubs.
Besides, things can always change.
P.S. Of course there remains another option open to QPR, which is to make the Council a fair offer for the land they need. Considering the state of local government finances, I doubt that LBH&F would turn the money down just because it was in foreign currency. |
As Lee Hoos has just said if any 'fan', individual or group, are willing to contribute to the £1M monthly loss the club is making, please get in touch!
When people bandy 'fan based ownership' about I think they forget that 'ownership' of anything costs money, ownership of a football club costs lots of money! [Post edited 29 Oct 2021 14:41]
| | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:35 - Oct 29 with 2103 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 12:42 - Oct 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
I'm 100% behind the Council. And before anyone starts, i've backed Tory Cllrs in other areas over similar issues with the FSA.
Would love a new stadium, but it can't come without benefit to the local community. The club (and by these I mean the directors) can't have their cake and eat it. Both Chelsea and Fulham provided community assets. Why are we so special?
Build on LFC, turn LR into whatever local amenity is needed. Simple. We are a football club not property speculators. |
What makes you think the club would not provide community assets as part of development, as they are doing at Heston.
Surely these days this is a given with this sort of development. | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:49 - Oct 29 with 2038 views | daveB |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 13:26 - Oct 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
No, it will be a land swap where the excess land will developed into either property or a cultural quarter with wine bars, outlets, and food kiosks. They might send coaches to the local schools but there will be no local governance of QPR or new schools, hospitals, GPs surgeries, parks, or social housing will there? |
I haven't seen any plans so have no idea.
The initial talk was of a Community Stadium with the athletics stadium rebuilt and able to be used by the community, I've no idea if that's still the case.
As I say they need to sit down and talk to each other although ultimately I can't see it ever happening |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:51 - Oct 29 with 2028 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:03 - Oct 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
1) Fulham have and will redevelop Bishops Park and updated the coastal marine pathway. Bear in mind though that Fulham didn't actually want any land from H&FC.
Spurs built a new sixth-form college, 300 homes, and a new primary school.
2) Yeah, foreign based property ownership avoids tax and leaves homes and shops empty. They should have been more careful with the wording though. |
Thanks Bazz. I understand it more now. |  |
| |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:57 - Oct 29 with 1982 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:23 - Oct 29 by R_from_afar |
This section is wonderful:
“As regards to fan ownership of the club, as I have stated before, any fans who would like an equity stake in the club and want to continue funding the deficits that we incur every year due to the condition of the current stadium, please get in contact as the shareholders would be delighted to be relieved of this onerous task".
  |
I find it to be childish and smug. In fact I think the whole letter is disappointingly amateurish with the tome of a Sixth Form debator.
For example, the sentence "Clearly the consultants misinterpreted the response they received from the council as they reported to us that Stephen Cowan did not want to meet anyone from QPR" is unnecessarily impudent, and naming (and possibly shaming) names won't help them.
The whole thing comes across as if they've just caught the Council out and scored a win. I think it runs the risk of steering them further from victory. To my mind the tone of the letter will make them few friends among the very people who're holding what they want. | |
| |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:11 - Oct 29 with 1908 views | NewBee |
Re. ParkRoyalR:
"Some things are more important than 'revenue opportunities' and a community football club of a 100+ years standing is one of these things (imo). "
Of course it's important, but to QPR fans.
Whereas for non-QPR supporting residents of the Borough, houses, jobs and lower Council Taxes etc are likely more important.
And while I don't know the split between QPR fans and non-QPR fans in the Borough, considering that so many regulars at LR live outside W12 these days, I'd guess that the non-fans are in a big majority locally.
More to the point, these local residents have votes. Meaning that until or unless QPRs owner can come up with something to trump this i.e. money, then H&F is always likely to go with the residents, not the club.
And I say all that as someone who, despite being a Bee, is always genuinely sympathetic to the fans of any club which finds itself in the sort of mess we were in until recently.
Well except Chelsea, at any rate. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:12 - Oct 29 with 1916 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:57 - Oct 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I find it to be childish and smug. In fact I think the whole letter is disappointingly amateurish with the tome of a Sixth Form debator.
For example, the sentence "Clearly the consultants misinterpreted the response they received from the council as they reported to us that Stephen Cowan did not want to meet anyone from QPR" is unnecessarily impudent, and naming (and possibly shaming) names won't help them.
The whole thing comes across as if they've just caught the Council out and scored a win. I think it runs the risk of steering them further from victory. To my mind the tone of the letter will make them few friends among the very people who're holding what they want. |
Don't agree. These things needed to be said publicly for them to have any chance of getting back in the game. Where they go from here is the important thing.
From the outside they just don't seem good at negotiating property matters. | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:13 - Oct 29 with 1899 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:32 - Oct 29 by ParkRoyalR |
Some things are more important than 'revenue opportunities' and a community football club of a 100+ years standing is one of these things (imo).
My take on our owners is that they seem a very decent bunch and have stood by their mistakes and us when they could have baled out. The club do great work in the community as do the owners at a low-key grass-roots level.
Just a shame imo that H&F hav'nt tried to develop a relationship with them and instead chose to play the Earls Court redevelopment / foreign ownership narrative which did'nt apply in this case. |
- Agree with your first paragraph
- Agree with some of your second paragraph
- Disagree fully with your third paragraph. |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:14 - Oct 29 with 1897 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:12 - Oct 29 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
Don't agree. These things needed to be said publicly for them to have any chance of getting back in the game. Where they go from here is the important thing.
From the outside they just don't seem good at negotiating property matters. |
I agree they need to be said, 100%, but I don't like the tone at all. | |
| |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:16 - Oct 29 with 1877 views | PinnerPaul |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:57 - Oct 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I find it to be childish and smug. In fact I think the whole letter is disappointingly amateurish with the tome of a Sixth Form debator.
For example, the sentence "Clearly the consultants misinterpreted the response they received from the council as they reported to us that Stephen Cowan did not want to meet anyone from QPR" is unnecessarily impudent, and naming (and possibly shaming) names won't help them.
The whole thing comes across as if they've just caught the Council out and scored a win. I think it runs the risk of steering them further from victory. To my mind the tone of the letter will make them few friends among the very people who're holding what they want. |
See what you mean Brian - but to trot out 'fan based ownership' as if
a) it was practical
b) easy
c) possible
d) would solve this and all the club's problems
is always going to elicit this sort of response. | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:16 - Oct 29 with 1861 views | NewBee |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 14:35 - Oct 29 by PinnerPaul |
As Lee Hoos has just said if any 'fan', individual or group, are willing to contribute to the £1M monthly loss the club is making, please get in touch!
When people bandy 'fan based ownership' about I think they forget that 'ownership' of anything costs money, ownership of a football club costs lots of money! [Post edited 29 Oct 2021 14:41]
|
In the absence of said "fan, individual or group" turning up in Shepherds Bush, then QPR will just have to play the cards they have.
Which doesn't allow for them to plead for a new hand (LCS for free) after the cards have already been dealt. | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:21 - Oct 29 with 1864 views | Phildo |
A new stadium at LCS would in my view be beneficial to the borough.
As the council own the land at LCS there are a number of legal ways they could use to secure the future of the club in the borough- They could grant a long lease of the land with fairly strict user conditions, they could retain a stake in ownership, they can impose a positive covenant on the land for the future. They can even impose overage payments to themselves at a market rate if the land were sold in the future. They can require the club to build new athletic facilities adjacent to the site. So no shortage of options for them to explore.
They certainly could propose a land exchange for LR if the concern relates to the redevelopment of that site. The London plan currently in place broadly views most brownfield sites going to residential in London anyway and LR is basically a brownfield site. It sits in a spot that needs a little TLC. The club may not fancy that but as a proposal it would be a lot more impressive than Johnny Foreigner go home.
As to foreign ownership of residential property - yes a bad thing, very bad- but what has that got to do with an important community asset like a football club? We are not talking about homes- or if we are make a sensible proposal for the LR site redevelopment. A new stadium with multi purpose use brings jobs and custom to the borough. The poor bit of the borough as well too - we are not in Fulham like those other two clubs in fairly swanky areas.
So what is the objection? It looks quite personal perhaps based on prejudice from 10 years ago when the club was behaving foolishly. That is silly, as is a remote PR war - on both sides. There ought to be constructive dialogue between the two with minutes released to local residents. |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:26 - Oct 29 with 1829 views | WokingR |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:14 - Oct 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I agree they need to be said, 100%, but I don't like the tone at all. |
And not necessarily in public either
You think they might have learned their lesson after the whole Car Giant fiasco.
Always best to keep people onside if you want to work with them. |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:28 - Oct 29 with 1819 views | LythamR |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:16 - Oct 29 by PinnerPaul |
See what you mean Brian - but to trot out 'fan based ownership' as if
a) it was practical
b) easy
c) possible
d) would solve this and all the club's problems
is always going to elicit this sort of response. |
i must say Hoos has gone down in my estimation with
"As regards to fan ownership of the club, as I have stated before, any fans who would like an equity stake in the club and want to continue funding the deficits that we incur every year due to the condition of the current stadium, please get in contact as the shareholders would be delighted to be relieved of this onerous task"
Which seems to me as dismissive of the supporters contribution to the club as Briatore
And particularly dismissive of the supporters who bought shares in the club previously and saw their value evaporate due to profligate spending by the club and its owners.
I doubt he will lose any sleep over this but it has given me the right arse, great bit of PR to keep supporters on side QPR! |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:28 - Oct 29 with 1819 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:16 - Oct 29 by PinnerPaul |
See what you mean Brian - but to trot out 'fan based ownership' as if
a) it was practical
b) easy
c) possible
d) would solve this and all the club's problems
is always going to elicit this sort of response. |
I agree - the Council's statements have been vague and cryptic at best, insulting at worst.
The Board have to win, though. Getting angry is a luxury they might not be able to afford. | |
| |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:32 - Oct 29 with 1789 views | Juzzie |
This is one of the probelm with t'internet.... too much public slanging.
Now they have both said their piece, just get together and get on with it. I couldn't give a fk about 'he said, she said" |  | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:35 - Oct 29 with 1765 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:28 - Oct 29 by LythamR |
i must say Hoos has gone down in my estimation with
"As regards to fan ownership of the club, as I have stated before, any fans who would like an equity stake in the club and want to continue funding the deficits that we incur every year due to the condition of the current stadium, please get in contact as the shareholders would be delighted to be relieved of this onerous task"
Which seems to me as dismissive of the supporters contribution to the club as Briatore
And particularly dismissive of the supporters who bought shares in the club previously and saw their value evaporate due to profligate spending by the club and its owners.
I doubt he will lose any sleep over this but it has given me the right arse, great bit of PR to keep supporters on side QPR! |
I think it was unfortunate phrasing, though the point is valid.
I'm a huge fan of Hoos, though, and happy to write this one off as an impulsive reaction.
The response was a bit rushed, maybe. | |
| |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:36 - Oct 29 with 1737 views | Juzzie |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:35 - Oct 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I think it was unfortunate phrasing, though the point is valid.
I'm a huge fan of Hoos, though, and happy to write this one off as an impulsive reaction.
The response was a bit rushed, maybe. |
I take it as more of a swipe at H&F by implying that fans simply cannot get involved in this manner.
A Bond scheme is about the most any can afford and whilst that may have been OK for the training ground, to expect fans to dig deep again for a stadium that will cost multiple times more is a stretch too far.
[Post edited 29 Oct 2021 15:43]
| | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:38 - Oct 29 with 1719 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:21 - Oct 29 by Phildo |
A new stadium at LCS would in my view be beneficial to the borough.
As the council own the land at LCS there are a number of legal ways they could use to secure the future of the club in the borough- They could grant a long lease of the land with fairly strict user conditions, they could retain a stake in ownership, they can impose a positive covenant on the land for the future. They can even impose overage payments to themselves at a market rate if the land were sold in the future. They can require the club to build new athletic facilities adjacent to the site. So no shortage of options for them to explore.
They certainly could propose a land exchange for LR if the concern relates to the redevelopment of that site. The London plan currently in place broadly views most brownfield sites going to residential in London anyway and LR is basically a brownfield site. It sits in a spot that needs a little TLC. The club may not fancy that but as a proposal it would be a lot more impressive than Johnny Foreigner go home.
As to foreign ownership of residential property - yes a bad thing, very bad- but what has that got to do with an important community asset like a football club? We are not talking about homes- or if we are make a sensible proposal for the LR site redevelopment. A new stadium with multi purpose use brings jobs and custom to the borough. The poor bit of the borough as well too - we are not in Fulham like those other two clubs in fairly swanky areas.
So what is the objection? It looks quite personal perhaps based on prejudice from 10 years ago when the club was behaving foolishly. That is silly, as is a remote PR war - on both sides. There ought to be constructive dialogue between the two with minutes released to local residents. |
It will almost certainly involve homes or commercial property. Not a single stadium built since the 70s hasn't. | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:40 - Oct 29 with 1702 views | PinnerPaul |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:28 - Oct 29 by LythamR |
i must say Hoos has gone down in my estimation with
"As regards to fan ownership of the club, as I have stated before, any fans who would like an equity stake in the club and want to continue funding the deficits that we incur every year due to the condition of the current stadium, please get in contact as the shareholders would be delighted to be relieved of this onerous task"
Which seems to me as dismissive of the supporters contribution to the club as Briatore
And particularly dismissive of the supporters who bought shares in the club previously and saw their value evaporate due to profligate spending by the club and its owners.
I doubt he will lose any sleep over this but it has given me the right arse, great bit of PR to keep supporters on side QPR! |
I suppose we all see it different ways, but as I said above you can't just bandy 'ownership' around without actually having some substance behind it.
Football's a funny old business - where else would company 'ownership' be expected by those not able or willing to provide any funds?
I admire the honesty of Lee Hoos - 'fans' can't expect 'ownership' if they are not funding the operation - "But its football" doesn't wash with me - but as I say, we all see things differently. | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:41 - Oct 29 with 1696 views | PinnerPaul |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:28 - Oct 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I agree - the Council's statements have been vague and cryptic at best, insulting at worst.
The Board have to win, though. Getting angry is a luxury they might not be able to afford. |
We agree once more Brian! | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:44 - Oct 29 with 1663 views | LythamR |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:36 - Oct 29 by Juzzie |
I take it as more of a swipe at H&F by implying that fans simply cannot get involved in this manner.
A Bond scheme is about the most any can afford and whilst that may have been OK for the training ground, to expect fans to dig deep again for a stadium that will cost multiple times more is a stretch too far.
[Post edited 29 Oct 2021 15:43]
|
And i think the Councils view is that not only can fans get involved but they already are involved as stakeholders who have been funding the club in the borough for 100 years and continue to do so on a weekly basis and as such should not simply be dismissed because we are not multi millionaires | | | |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:45 - Oct 29 with 1663 views | Juzzie |
| Linford Christie Stadium. on 15:38 - Oct 29 by BazzaInTheLoft |
It will almost certainly involve homes or commercial property. Not a single stadium built since the 70s hasn't. |
A free flat with every season ticket?! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
