Year Ago: Bhatia Willing to Take Over

But there's no R in Gianni Paladini

I'd say Briatore should once again act against the leaker

To combine the two stories: This from the Oct 1, Times
Some interesting snippets here

The Times October 1, 2009

Flavio Briatore eyes QPR exit after ‘Crashgate’

Kevin Eason, Sports News Correspondent

Flavio Briatore could be ready to sell his way out of football to avoid a confrontation with the authorities if he is put through another fit and proper persons test.

The Football League’s eight-man board sits next week for what could be a defining meeting as it tries to sift through an increasing pile of evidence surrounding three famous names.

There are question marks over the ownership of Leeds United and Notts County, while Briatore’s reputation is liable to be put through another examination as the board tries to determine whether a man thrown out of Formula One for cheating is fit and proper to run Queens Park Rangers, of the Coca-Cola Championship, as the club’s co-owner.

Speculation is growing that Briatore will head for the exit rather than be put through the wringer again by another sporting body. Amit Bhatia, the QPR vice-chairman, is said to be letting it known to friends and business acquaintances that he would be willing to buy out Briatore if the Italian wants to go.
Briatore has not decided what to do yet as he ponders his options after “Crashgate”, including contesting the judgment by the FIA, the governing body of motor sport, that he, as managing director of the Renault Formula One team, led the plot for Nelson Piquet Jr to crash his car so that Fernando Alonso, his team-mate, could win last year’s Singapore Grand Prix.

Bhatia is the son-in-law of Lakshmi Mittal, the billionaire steel magnate and the eighth-richest man in the world. But Mittal is not thought to be interested in QPR, even though he bought 20 per cent of the club from Briatore. The numbers are tiny compared with Mittal’s £12 billion fortune, but Briatore will want to make his departure financially worthwhile.
Briatore is thought to have paid £540,000 for his original 54 per cent shareholding, with club debts covered by loans. Briatore’s money was paid through Sarita Capital, a company registered in the British Virgin Islands, a tax haven in the Caribbean and an increasingly popular repository for investors in the League.


Munto Finance, the company that bought County, is also registered there, too far away for the Football League, with its slender resources, to be able to look into the details of its investors. But revelations in The Times about some of the people involved in the takeover at Meadow Lane have caused concern and the Football League’s board will want to examine the County case in some detail before rubber-stamping the takeover.

As a result, the fit and proper persons test and how it is applied will come under severe scrutiny, with the League’s board bound to tighten the rules to try to prevent new cases creeping under the wire.

The board is examining County three months after Munto Finance acquired the club, while there are increasing concerns about who owns Leeds two years after Ken Bates, the club’s chairman, controversially bought the club out of administration.
Bates is said to have admitted in a Jersey court that he was not the owner of the club, but declared he could not reveal the identities of the investors behind the true owners of Leeds, a company called Forward Sports Fund, registered in the Cayman Islands, another Caribbean tax haven.

Next week’s meeting of the board promises to be one of the trickiest faced by Lord Mawhinney, the League chairman, with three high-profile clubs to scrutinise without damaging the credibility of the League, particularly at a time when he is searching for a new title sponsor for all three divisions. Coca-Cola, which has spent £6 million over each of the past three years, is parting company with the League, although Mawhinney believes that he can find a replacement with recession fears easing.

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/football_league/article6855976.ece

This is a good time anyway KLR.

Briatore not about, no transfer window to be balls up in.

Just a settled football team who have improved beyond wildest expectations in the last four games. ;D

if he gets rid of Paladini, I may discontinue my boycott against the club & come over for a visit.

Why all the anti-Briatore comments? Our club was going nowhere until he took an interest. Yes he has made mistakes, but the R's are in a far better place now than before he came onto the scene. I don't condone what happened in Singapore but that has nothing to do with QPR. I for one will always be appreciative to Briatore for what he has done for us.

Fair view. I certainly think there's a certain bandwagon on some people's part, who not long ago were fawning over Flavio. And the very same "facts" about QPR which were being reported/rumoured which were denied or explained or condoned, etc...are suddenly pointed to.

A couple of points

Whether IF he really did what he's accused of in F1, should that exclude from being a Director.

Assessing His performance as QPR Chairman: Money, involvement, Managerial sacking, team involvement, etc. I've said that the club has spent a lot of money on players/salaries/paying off fired coaches, etc. I just say not so wisely..


And I'll leave to others...

Fair enough, but I think the issue here is not about individuals, its about safeguarding the integrity & reputation of the club, which is bigger than any one person or individual.
Its a moral & ethical responsibility to a well loved 127 year old institution that has been passed down from Grandfathers to fathers to Sons, of course Briatore cant be allowwed to threaten tarnish that.
Briatores contribution will be debated, but of course he cant be allowed to be associated with the club anymore, there is more at stake than just his own reputation, he has let himself down, but should he be allowed to drag the name of the club in to this moral quagmire ??
No, of course not, & my personal opinion is that I would be astounded if there is any genuine QPR fan that thinks he should be allowed to carry on having an association & influence at our football club.
Arrivederci Flavio.

What is preferable here ??
Is it to be morally bankrupt, or financially bankrupt ?
I dont think tthere is any justification for defending Briatore, certainly no need for anyones "Loyalty" to be called in to question
He treated our club with little more than contempt, certainly didnt show it / us any "respect" so excuse me If I / we dont all queue up to defend him, he's a busted flush, finished, finito.
Arrivederci Flavio, go and live your ridiculous life somewhere else away from our club.

OK, but no question you've been consistent in your view. My point was that some others, in some places, are jumping on the bandwagon (includingperhaps at the club).

And I imagine you'd agree (might not like it but agree) that for the majority of supporters: They're not too focused on means: Just the ultimate result. And they'd certainly prefer to be run by someone "morally bankrupt" (to use your rather strong term) than for the club to be "financially bankrupt" certainly not everyone. But I'd say the majority.

Now it looks like being a win/win...So don't have to have this tough choice