|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 29, 2010 8:48:42 GMT
How anyone can view the "reemergence" of Briatore without trepidation, I don't understand...
He's either in...Or he's out. (And maybe he never was truly out. In which case, that says something pretty major)
As long as Briatore is involved (in anything but a very minor shareholder) it is like the Sword of Damoclese hovering over the manager's head...and over the head of Fans.
|
|
|
Post by Jon Doeman on Oct 29, 2010 8:56:23 GMT
What makes me laugh, is them trying to make out he wasn't trying to get out. And hasn't just changed his mind cos of the sweet smell of potential success!
|
|
|
Post by The Scooter on Oct 29, 2010 9:11:31 GMT
All to do with movement on the stadium and potential relocation. Too much potential cash for FB to walk away. Batten down the hatches everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 29, 2010 9:20:10 GMT
I guess you'd have to be pretty cynical to believe that there was a fan "stalking horse" defending the continued QPR involvement of Briatore as no big deal.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 29, 2010 9:21:30 GMT
All to do with movement on the stadium and potential relocation. Too much potential cash for FB to walk away. Batten down the hatches everyone. Is there a location for new stadium... And how does one make money from a new stadium?... (And I've said before: No moving OUT of Loftus Road until the new Stadium is actually built. Other clubs have been screwed that way)
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Oct 29, 2010 9:32:34 GMT
I'm still trying to figure out how he got so rich?
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Oct 29, 2010 9:56:01 GMT
Briatore and Paladini are a disaster waiting to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Oct 29, 2010 9:57:40 GMT
Can we not transfer them both to someone like Napoli?
|
|
|
Post by The Scooter on Oct 29, 2010 10:10:16 GMT
All to do with movement on the stadium and potential relocation. Too much potential cash for FB to walk away. Batten down the hatches everyone. Is there a location for new stadium... And how does one make money from a new stadium?...(And I've said before: No moving OUT of Loftus Road until the new Stadium is actually built. Other clubs have been screwed that way) Short term in the Championship - you simply don't, unless the money you receive (and remember Bhatia and Briatore personally own the site - not the Club) for the old site is more than the cost of the build of the new one. Longer term in the Premier League - naming rights, corporate funding, gate receipts, secondary usage (conferencing, hotel etc.) - you could make a pretty penny if situated correctly. Reading have done their ground move very, very well. My concern is that we don't own Loftus Road or our training ground. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that, similar to Chris Wright, the land and site are used to line the pockets of the owner, rather than the club.
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Oct 29, 2010 10:39:54 GMT
Is there a location for new stadium... And how does one make money from a new stadium?...(And I've said before: No moving OUT of Loftus Road until the new Stadium is actually built. Other clubs have been screwed that way) Short term in the Championship - you simply don't, unless the money you receive (and remember Bhatia and Briatore personally own the site - not the Club) for the old site is more than the cost of the build of the new one. Longer term in the Premier League - naming rights, corporate funding, gate receipts, secondary usage (conferencing, hotel etc.) - you could make a pretty penny if situated correctly. Reading have done their ground move very, very well. My concern is that we don't own Loftus Road or our training ground. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that, similar to Chris Wright, the land and site are used to line the pockets of the owner, rather than the club. I thought there were restrictions on what the Loftus Rd site could be used for if ever sold making it less valuable?
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Oct 29, 2010 10:44:27 GMT
and remember Bhatia and Briatore personally own the site - not the Club As far as I was aware up until August of this year, the holding company still owned the ground under the terms and conditions of the Sarita loan which was put in place to offset the ABC loan at a slightly reduced interest rate. Nodge, are you going by the fact that as Sarita is actually Briatore and Bhattia they own the ground defacto or we have defaulted on repayment and now they own the ground outrite? As is my suspicion, as there was no mention in August of extending the loan arrangement and with this lot bad news is often covered up with spin or simply swept under the carpet. Can you elaborate on this please? My concern is that we don't own Loftus Road or our training ground. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that, similar to Chris Wright, the land and site are used to line the pockets of the owner, rather than the club. That's the closest to what I perceive is their main intention for involvement. Now that promotion is looking like a possibility and we could sustain ourselves in a larger ground, it's worth hanging on to their shares as simply announcing plans for a new ground will raise their share price and allow them to start submitting plans for the redevelopment of Loftus Road before we find a new location. Remember promises from this lot only remain in they stay profitable to them. If not they'll just break them again and again as that would be the astute business decision. Don't trust them at all to be working in the best interests of this club, only themselves. I am a bit confused though, only a couple of months ago we were reading how all the problems we faced were Flabio's fault and how much better we were without him and now the spin changes again with old news regurgitated as ITK fact and a push towards accepting him as our saviour again. More transparent bullshit from the kids.
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Oct 29, 2010 10:46:43 GMT
I thought there were restrictions on what the Loftus Rd site could be used for if ever sold making it less valuable? Unless you know a guy who knows about the loopholes....... Money talks above all else.
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Oct 29, 2010 11:01:37 GMT
hmmm, so Flab had never gone, Kingfisher was never on, restrictions on the use of the ground are gone!
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 29, 2010 11:07:50 GMT
And the "Defenders of The Faith" Spin on
As Mark noted, the Sarita two year loan period deadline came and went with no QPR comment
|
|
|
Post by klr on Oct 29, 2010 11:53:00 GMT
Briatore is a X*XX.
Edited by markqpr.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 29, 2010 11:56:19 GMT
I'd prefer less abusive terminology - even re him!
Bottom line; What may be good for Flavio may not be in the best interest of QPR as a club and its future. That's what fans need to remember
|
|
|
Post by blueeyedcptcook on Oct 29, 2010 12:30:04 GMT
Lone and my other QPR friends, if you want to see how the devious Briatori made his money just Google Briatori, it makes you wonder how the FA ever allowed him to be involved. in a English Football Club.
|
|
|
Post by The Scooter on Oct 29, 2010 12:44:20 GMT
My logic was dictated upon ownership still being with Sarita (de facto Briatore and Bhatia) - not heard anything about default or transfer of ownership. Maybe some checking at the Land Registry could shed light?
|
|
|
Post by The Scooter on Oct 29, 2010 12:47:48 GMT
hmmm, so Flab had never gone, Kingfisher was never on, restrictions on the use of the ground are gone! Kingfisher/Mallya was definitely on. Something has changed over the past 6 months that meant Briatore has decided to sit tight. I've never seen any documentary evidence of any sporting/social housing covenant on Loftus Road either, though it is often mentioned. If one does exist, these can easily be overcome - especially if we were to remain in the Borough.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Oct 29, 2010 13:19:35 GMT
There is often talk about the 'BBC' site but I'm afraid I'm not up to date on what the position is there. With some saying Chelsea might move there, just as they said Fulham might move to the dairy site by White City station.
At one time, I even had the impression that the Council were trying to pressure the dairy crest site owners to let Fayed do as he pleased with it, with the owners understandably underwhelmed.
The uncomfortable logic is that selling 'inner city' or valuable stadium sites is a lucrative prospect. And as the authorities, and many supporters, as well as the 'media', accept that dumping enormous debts on Clubs is all right, a Club can be turned out of its home, the proceeds pocketed by its 'representatives', a new stadium built at the Club's expense, leaving it with enormous losses, while the owners either clear off or stay on to run up even bigger debts in an attempt to push up their share price.
Hearing Gold and Sullivan talking about moving West Ham to the Olympic stadium almost defies belief.
They talk a lot about the Ground they'll move West Ham to - 60,000 capacity, more or less West Ham's average attendance, of course - but very little about the Ground they will presumably sell off.
There seem to be plenty of examples of Clubs finding their assets appropriated or alienated by people who provided little or nothing in return. Nobody knows where the money for Coventry's ground - about £19 million I think - disappeared to - although some rather obvious guesses are possible. All that is known for sure is that the Club doesn't own its present one.
Chris Wright is at it again, trying to push Wycombe out of theirs, according to some Wycombe supporters, having long ago moved Wasps out of their former site. While Chelsea don't even own the Bridge, Fayed's losses make Fulham's tenure at CC doubtful to say the least. Brighton were simply asset-stripped, like Palace and Wimbledon.
But surely the real trick is to get the Club to pay for everything twice and then leave it with nothing. Look at Oxford. Had their ground sold off, now they'll have to pay for the new one. Why? Surely the proceeds of the old one did that? Be serious.
The Gold and Sullivan deal at Brum was eyecatching. No debt, they said, although it turned out the debt was £20 million, which is £19 million more debt than the Club had when they arrived.
They paid £1, pocketed £80 million, and in all that time Birmingham never ceased to be the Club it was before. 1 year in the 3rd division, 10 or so in the second tier, and 3 or 4 in the top flight.
Be even more grotesque if the new owner dumps the £80 million he paid them on the Club.
|
|
|
Post by The Scooter on Oct 29, 2010 13:56:55 GMT
Chelsea are, last I heard, still locked in deep level, highly confidential talks with Earls Court and TfL about a new ground on the site of Earl's Court, Earl's Court2 and Lillie Bridge depot.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Oct 29, 2010 14:15:36 GMT
I'd hate us to move out of the area. Being a local club means much more to me than any promise of success.
If the Unigate plot is a possibility then that would be the best option. If costs are prohibitive then build/share with Fulham.
|
|
|
Post by harlowranger on Oct 29, 2010 20:59:09 GMT
Reading this you would think Briatore was a meek little Angel sent from Football heaven!
New Owners, New Lifeline In August 2007, QPR was bought for £14m by Bernie Ecclestone and Flavio Briatore, both tycoons of the Formula One world. Not only did Briatore and Ecclestone lift the club out of the red, some £13 million of debt, they also pledged £5 million to purchase new talent. Four months later, Ecclestone and Briatore sold 20% of their ownership to steel businessman Lakshmi Mittal, a value of just £200,000. Mittal's son-in-law was then given a place on the board of directors. Gianni Paladini has held on to his status as the club's chairman, although chairman of QPR's parent company (QPR Holdings) Alejandro Agag is the de facto chairman of the club.
While Mittal seems motivated purely by the interests of his son-in-law, Mittal himself is set to be a silent investor. Meanwhile, Briatore and Ecclestone have the task of slowly building the club up again, exemplified by their target of a Premier League return by 2009. They also plan to refurbish and modernise Loftus Road, at the same time boosting sponsorship revenues.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 30, 2010 0:12:28 GMT
Gianni saved the club
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Oct 30, 2010 2:37:12 GMT
Yes, Flavios mother, was exasperated with the little boy. could never please him she said, Always wanted two three'elpings of ravioli and chicken Marsala, we ad little. Very clever little boy though, thanks to god only one little flavio. Mrs Briatore recently discovered unpublished papers and memoirs.
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Oct 30, 2010 5:04:28 GMT
Lone and my other QPR friends, if you want to see how the devious Briatori made his money just Google Briatori, it makes you wonder how the FA ever allowed him to be involved. in a English Football Club. Is the FA the same Pink Gin Drinkers Old Boys Club that lets certain top 6 EPL clubs get adway with pretty much anything they want to, yet, docks teams like Luton 30 points??
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 30, 2010 7:13:43 GMT
Fans should be proactive rather than reactive...Prepare now rather than wait for a fait accomplit. And a minimum first step: Establish the facts.
Excellent results on the field shouldn't lull fans to ignore also remaining focused on their club's future. - Unless you believe that fans are completely helpless and should just enjoy the ride while it lasts
|
|
|
Post by toboboly on Oct 30, 2010 9:01:24 GMT
It's so depressing when things like this come to the fore again. I remember when many said "He's gone" that a fair few others commented that he was still at the club and that with him and GP there was always a threat of things returning to the status quo that had developed, the farce and unmitigated disaster after disaster that seemed heaped upon club and fans daily.
I would rather we were ourselves, even if that meant no takeover, no success. What a crappy morning; flu and this!
|
|
|
Post by saphilip on Oct 30, 2010 9:32:40 GMT
But that is what I have been saying for a while now. I couldn't care less what title they were given following the shake up at QPR during the tail end of last season, so long as Flabman and Former Two Bit agent remained at QPR, in whatever capacity, the potential for them to do harm at QPR was alweays there.
No I was told, because they are now in the background the potential has been greatly reduced - forgetting that being in the background is exactly where they can do the most harm.
As I have been saying for a while it all stems back to the potential value of land where Loftus Road currently stands.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Oct 30, 2010 9:51:38 GMT
Not only did Briatore and Ecclestone lift the club out of the red, some £13 million of debt ... Amazing. Debt £25 million - not £13 million - before they arrive, a loss of £6 million to the Club the next season, another £6million unless I'm seeing double, then a loss of £18 million in the last published accounting year. All the Club's money, none of it theirs. Emotionally, I agree with Zed, except about groundsharing. To me groundsharing is only asset-stripping and offers no benefits. If a Club can't cope with its own problems, how will it manage when it is shackled to another basket case. If a ground isn't worthwhile for a Club to own outright, it isn't worthwhile for anyone else to own outright. On the one hand, we're always being told what viable 'businesses' they are, how much money they make, and how much more they will make in the future because everyone at the Club is so talented. But it can't afford a home of its own. Even though it can afford to pay for any number of homes for the losers who play for it, manage it, and run it into the ground. Just my personal opinion, of course .
|
|