|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 14, 2011 19:14:47 GMT
23 years ago....
QPR Official Site - May 15, 2000
WRIGHT'S STADIUM HOPES
CHAIRMAN Chris Wright has given an update on his long-term plan to move Rangers and Wasps to a new home.
Mr Wright said: "Ultimately, I believe the way forward for clubs is to have brand new stadiums with great
facilities and fantastic comforts for the fans to come and see their teams play in.
"Doing that in London is difficult. If we can do it, and we are working very hard to do it,
we want a new 30-35,000 seat stadium with great access and parking in an area
where we know that the bulk of our fans live.
"Unfortunately, it is not as easy as it was for clubs like Stoke City or Sunderland, where the land prices
in those sorts of areas are much less than they are in West London. So it is very difficult.
"But if we could do it and we could get into the Premiership, then with a regular attendance of 30-35,000
we would be competitive and we would be able to stay in the Premiership. So that has to be the ultimate
objective for QPR to be playing in the Premier League and to be able to maintain our position in the
Premier League and to be able to compete in the Premier League.
"In order to be able to do that, you have to be playing in a 35,000 seater stadium
and pretty well filling it every week. We clearly can't do that at Loftus Road
because we can only hold 19,000 at most."
|
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on May 14, 2011 19:29:27 GMT
Where did he plan on putting it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 14, 2011 21:44:21 GMT
Wasn't it near London Airport?
(Or maybe that was one of the other suitors trying to buy QPR. Not Winkelman cos he wanted Milton Keynes)
Cant remember what the Melzac consortium wanted. Don't think they were advocating airport either
|
|
|
|
Post by maudesfishnchips on May 14, 2011 23:16:42 GMT
i remember his offices for chrysilis was on latimer rd, and behind that was a old scrap yard, maybe he got fed up of looking out of his window at a pile of rubbish and thought i'll build a stadium there.
|
|
|
|
Post by 56vespanvic on May 15, 2011 0:05:59 GMT
He'd have been more likely to build houses on the scrap yard - not a football stadium. After all, didn't he SELL a ground - Wasps home at Sudbury- and see it filled with houses by Shenley Homes?
And aren't Wasps, to this day, without a home that they can call their own?
Mind you, in effect, doesn't the same apply to OUR 'Club'?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on May 15, 2011 0:12:25 GMT
Very true Vic.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on May 15, 2011 8:39:58 GMT
How seductive it all is until you think about it a bit. Just think of a figure - not too big - and, almost effortlessly, the Club's 'potential' is more or less doubled.
Not sure about that. Can't remember Newcastle outperforming Arsenal with 10,000 more seats. And Arsenal, with 15,000 more seats than they had at Highbury, have achieved 100% failure.
And now they have set their inferior capacity to United in stone, with a permanent disability of 15,000. On the other hand, Chelsea also won the League with attendances of 'only' 45,000 or so. And Southampton kept themselves in the top flight in the 'unsuitable' Dell for decades, a ground which eventually had about the same capacity as LR. Until they finally geared up for Europe and probably Outer Space too, for all I know. With the result that they were in the second tier - come to think of it, even the third tier - in no time.
Personally I think stadium deals are property developments. If they make money for the developers, the Clubs will be pushed out of their homes. Just as the Clubs will run up colossal losses if doing so makes money for the share speculators who run them.
West Ham at the Olympic Stadium. What's the relevance? Upton Park can now be quietly sold off. And who will pocket the proceeds from that deal?
Interested to see where football goes from here. When the Clubs had little debt and invaluable unencumbered assets in the form of their Grounds - that they owned outright for the most part, the best that they could do in the golden Premiership world future was to lose money.
What will happen to their finances now? Will billionaires worth ten times what the present owners are worth simply buy up any Club for ten times what the last lot paid for it? Will TV pay ten times more as well?
Or will a point be reached at which the tide starts going out again?
I find myself wondering what Ecclestone paid for QPR. Not much if reports at the time were anything to go by. Yet now he wants £100 million.
Why so little? Why not £1,000 million? If the money doesn't matter, if someone rich will simply swallow the losses - few signs of that - why can't a Club like ours just outspend United and the others? And why does Ecclestone want £100 million when chaps like that are prepared to take the hit themselves?
If debt doesn't matter, and the money is simply written off, why aren't we spending more? What reason for limiting the losses can there be?
|
|
|
|
Post by bp on May 15, 2011 8:53:54 GMT
How seductive it all is until you think about it a bit. Just think of a figure - not too big - and, almost effortlessly, the Club's 'potential' is more or less doubled. Not sure about that. Can't remember Newcastle outperforming Arsenal with 10,000 more seats. And Arsenal, with 15,000 more seats than they had at Highbury, have achieved 100% failure. And now they have set their inferior capacity to United in stone, with a permanent disability of 15,000. On the other hand, Chelsea also won the League with attendances of 'only' 45,000 or so. And Southampton kept themselves in the top flight in the 'unsuitable' Dell for decades, a ground which eventually had about the same capacity as LR. Until they finally geared up for Europe and probably Outer Space too, for all I know. With the result that they were in the second tier - come to think of it, even the third tier - in no time. Personally I think stadium deals are property developments. If they make money for the developers, the Clubs will be pushed out of their homes. Just as the Clubs will run up colossal losses if doing so makes money for the share speculators who run them. West Ham at the Olympic Stadium. What's the relevance? Upton Park can now be quietly sold off. And who will pocket the proceeds from that deal? Interested to see where football goes from here. When the Clubs had little debt and invaluable unencumbered assets in the form of their Grounds - that they owned outright for the most part, the best that they could do in the golden Premiership world future was to lose money. What will happen to their finances now? Will billionaires worth ten times what the present owners are worth simply buy up any Club for ten times what the last lot paid for it? Will TV pay ten times more as well? Or will a point be reached at which the tide starts going out again? I find myself wondering what Ecclestone paid for QPR. Not much if reports at the time were anything to go by. Yet now he wants £100 million. Why so little? Why not £1,000 million? If the money doesn't matter, if someone rich will simply swallow the losses - few signs of that - why can't a Club like ours just outspend United and the others? And why does Ecclestone want £100 million when chaps like that are prepared to take the hit themselves? If debt doesn't matter, and the money is simply written off, why aren't we spending more? What reason for limiting the losses can there be? Peter, you've been eating too many E numbers again!! But if you can find anyone who wants to waste a measly billion or two, please send them my way, cheers.  |
|
|
|
Post by bp on May 15, 2011 9:05:59 GMT
Oh and I think the site they were looking at was opposite Northolt Aerodrome.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2011 9:10:15 GMT
It was Andrew Ellis who wanted us by Heathrow (as opposed to Glasgow!)
BBC - July 29, 2001 - QPR boss Ian Holloway opposes ground move
QPR manager Ian Holloway has spoken out against prospective owner Andrew Ellis' plans to relocate the club to Heathrow.
Holloway said: "You can't suddenly tell someone that they have got to drive 20 miles to support their team - it just doesn't work.
"I'm very proud of this place. This is our tribe, we are strong together and this is where we live.
"I like this cave we are in and I want to keep living in it. That's as blunt as it has got to be," he added. BBC
BBC - Thursday, 26 July, 2001, Council opposes QPR move
QPR owner Chris Wright has indicated that he is prepared to snub a consortium takeover bid and sell the club to Andrew Ellis.
Ellis plans to relocate the club to Heathrow and a consortium of wealthy Rangers fans have tabled an offer in the hope of preventing the move.
Hammersmith and Fulham Council are also set to oppose plans to move the club to Heathrow.
The overwhelming majority of QPR fans say that the club is associated with the ground
Hammersmith mayor Andrew Slaughter
A motion to back QPR fans in their opposition to the move was unanimously supported at a council meeting on Wednesday.
Councillor Wesley Harcourt claimed: "We can make it very difficult for the ground to be sold at a profit."
Mayor Andrew Slaughter added: "There appears to be two bids - the Ellis bid to move QPR to Heathrow and create a kind of Chelsea-type village, while the other bid is committed to keeping QPR at Loftus Road.
"The overwhelming majority of QPR fans say that the club is associated with the ground.
"We aim to see QPR survive and thrive at Loftus Road."
But The Sun quote Wright as saying: "It would be in the best long term interests of the club to move."
Wright is in exclusive talks with Ellis in an attempt to give him the best possible chance of putting a bid together. He has until 6 August to complete the deal. BBC
BBC - Wednesday, 1 August, 2001 - Ellis pulls out of QPR bid
Former Queens Park Rangers director Andrew Ellis has withdrawn his bid for control of the west London club.
The move paves the way for a fans' consortium to ease the troubled club out of administration.
Estate agent Ellis had been granted a three-week lock-out period to prove he had the cash to back up his proposal.
The only other bid tabled so far comes from the fans' consortium headed by Maurice Fitzgerald, who have pledged to keep the club at Loftus Road.
A club statement read: "Andrew Ellis has withdrawn his bid to buy QPR and the period of exclusivity granted to him no longer exists.
"With regards to other bids, the club has received the outline of a possible deal from the consortium led by Maurice Fitzgerald, which the club are also looking at."
Deeply unpopular
The Ellis bid had been deeply unpopular with fans because it proposed moving the club from Loftus Road to a new site near Heathrow, 16 miles away.
Fitzgerald's bid is apparently backed by a major investment company and private investors.
The bid is centred on around keeping the club at Loftus Road, with current manager Ian Holloway remaining in charge. BBC
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2011 9:10:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on May 15, 2011 9:13:31 GMT
How seductive it all is until you think about it a bit. Just think of a figure - not too big - and, almost effortlessly, the Club's 'potential' is more or less doubled. Not sure about that. Can't remember Newcastle outperforming Arsenal with 10,000 more seats. And Arsenal, with 15,000 more seats than they had at Highbury, have achieved 100% failure. And now they have set their inferior capacity to United in stone, with a permanent disability of 15,000. On the other hand, Chelsea also won the League with attendances of 'only' 45,000 or so. And Southampton kept themselves in the top flight in the 'unsuitable' Dell for decades, a ground which eventually had about the same capacity as LR. Until they finally geared up for Europe and probably Outer Space too, for all I know. With the result that they were in the second tier - come to think of it, even the third tier - in no time. Personally I think stadium deals are property developments. If they make money for the developers, the Clubs will be pushed out of their homes. Just as the Clubs will run up colossal losses if doing so makes money for the share speculators who run them. West Ham at the Olympic Stadium. What's the relevance? Upton Park can now be quietly sold off. And who will pocket the proceeds from that deal? Interested to see where football goes from here. When the Clubs had little debt and invaluable unencumbered assets in the form of their Grounds - that they owned outright for the most part, the best that they could do in the golden Premiership world future was to lose money. What will happen to their finances now? Will billionaires worth ten times what the present owners are worth simply buy up any Club for ten times what the last lot paid for it? Will TV pay ten times more as well? Or will a point be reached at which the tide starts going out again? I find myself wondering what Ecclestone paid for QPR. Not much if reports at the time were anything to go by. Yet now he wants £100 million. Why so little? Why not £1,000 million? If the money doesn't matter, if someone rich will simply swallow the losses - few signs of that - why can't a Club like ours just outspend United and the others? And why does Ecclestone want £100 million when chaps like that are prepared to take the hit themselves? If debt doesn't matter, and the money is simply written off, why aren't we spending more? What reason for limiting the losses can there be? Peter, you've been eating too many E numbers again!! But if you can find anyone who wants to waste a measly billion or two, please send them my way, cheers. I'd settle for 50k right now. Any takers? |
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on May 15, 2011 13:42:20 GMT
I think most major QPR creditors expected to get money back from someone when they ran up losses at the Club's expense, or bought themselves shares at their own.
So someone, presumably, is expected to come up with the £1.5 billion plus losses that perennial losers Chelsea and Man City have incurred at the hands of Abramovich and others.
Abramovich paid off Bates. So who will pay off Abramovich for giving Ferguson 'opponents' he can usually beat with his eyes closed? United take the title yet again. Even when Chelsea's £800 million losses enable them to buy players, while United's comparable deficit prevents them doing so.
Talent still has something to do with it. Even in the Premier League, it seems.
While the biggest Clubs are still the ones that win the football competitions. Not just the ones that lose the most money.
|
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 15, 2011 17:28:38 GMT
Oh and I think the site they were looking at was opposite Northolt Aerodrome. The ski slope at Hillingdon was it not? Western International Market was also rumoured I believe. |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2012 7:05:10 GMT
Bump...
12 years ago
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2013 8:35:20 GMT
Bump...13 Years ago
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on May 15, 2013 13:41:23 GMT
Solve the football problem and the rest takes care of itself.
Better football produces better results, better results GRADUALLY bring more support, more money, and, in the long term, the BASIS for constructing a new ground.
Provided the footballing magic is CONSTANT, and of very long duration. Liverpool still haven't moved. The Liverpool board delude themselves that the Ground is the problem.
They are the problem. They're a waste of space.
Same at United. United have managed just fine in the same old Old Trafford. It isn't anywhere near their record attendance yet, and they've had 20 years of success on top of the Busby era which made their name and made them 'global' in the true (footballing) sense of the word.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2014 8:41:03 GMT
Flash forward to 2014....
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2014 8:42:29 GMT
As opposed to... On This Day April 12, 1968 On This Day in 1968, QPR played Jimmy Scoular's Cardiff, with Wilkes in for Rodney...And Cardiff, with John Toshack wearing #10...QPR were 3 points clear at the top (p35, 49 points).Ipwsich and Blackpool with 46 points... Cardiff 6 away from bottom! (although Cardiff were in the European Cup Winner Cup Semi Final) QPR won 1-0.... In the South East Counties League, QPR were top with 42 points. Chelsea 2nd with 39....
And in the programme: Announcement of the New Stand (later to be called South Africa Road Stand)"We have decided after a lot of discussion and speculation, that our future is here and that we mean to stay." Read more: qprreport.proboards.com/thread/38807/announce-staying-loftus-build-stand#ixzz31luyOnAY |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2015 9:40:41 GMT
Bump
15 Years
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2016 10:02:29 GMT
Bump...16 years ago
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 15, 2017 13:28:48 GMT
Flashback 17 Years
|
|
