|
|
Post by Bushman on Mar 19, 2013 11:54:05 GMT
All that talk about a training ground, a new ground, an academy. Strange, isn't it? The Club never GETS anything from him and all the people like him, does it? Gregory, and Bulstrode, and Marler and Wright, who all wanted to take the Ground AWAY. And what does his mouthpiece tell us? That the Club will lose its home - and get nothing. It will be - a 'tenant'. Really? Whose tenant? His? This 'benefactor'? So his 'generosity' is that the Club will pay HIM to play in a Ground HE owns, while the Club owns nothing, because he and multibillionaire can't find a way of paying off the £10 million debt his predecessors ran up at the Club's expense. That IS principled, isn't it? And for £10 million? And he and his chums are looking for ANOTHER way to put money in their pockets at QPR's expense. That, after all, is what a tenant does, isn't it? Come on, admit it. You don't think QPR will actually OWN this behemoth of a stadium. Big enough to host any number of losing runs. We've broken the record once, but why stop there? Strange, too, isn't it, that while they are falling over themselves to sign one useless squad after another - they hardly sign individual players now, it's entire herds of the things - they can't put aside £10 million of the Clubs OWN money to pay off a debt the Club - once again - owes to THEM. He had no league status. No stadium. No support. To say QPR is lacking is an insult. HE is lacking. He is nothing in football. He has achieved nothing in football. Except to make our rivals laugh. And any achievements, in future, as in the past, will be QPR's. Whoever is the 'shareholder of the month'. It will the Club's name, the Club's resources, and the Club's money - not to say the Club's support - which makes it possible, and nothing else. People who run up record - oh yes, that's another record, of course, the losses - RECORD losses just make it all that much harder. The day QPR gets on with being a football club, and forgets the empty boasting, and the me, me, me of people who think that a Club that has survived any number of people like them is somehow lacking while they have got what it takes, that will be the day indeed. Football, that is what is lacking. The Club has all the potential it can handle. If only it had the kind of people running it who respected the reality of the game, and had the humility to realise how little THEY had and how laughable it is to compare themselves with a Club like QPR and find US wanting! So I agree with Bushman. There's always another one along in a minute. The Club fought off Gregory's various attempts to help himself to the Club's resources, Bulstrode, Marler, Wright, and we're still lumbered with Thompson's £10 million asking price, the price, I assume of taking us DOWN, which was his parting gift. The curious thing is that we can live with that. We have no choice, given the quality of most of them. But while we live in the real world, they go on losing the Club's money, and trying to kid us - as his pal Bhatia has been doing - that there IS no debt. Thompson is gone. Wright is gone. But there seem to be plenty more where he came from. And the battles to keep the Club afloat despite them, may be long and hard for a long time to come. What - precisely - is the point of having them at all? Why on earth would anyone or anything want to LOSE its home, LOSE hundreds and millions, but provide an easy vehicle for the people responsible to MAKE money out their lack of experience, know-how and talent for the game. If the Club got steadily bigger and richer, or at the very least, wealthier, more profitable, year by year, with all these wealthy and profitable INVESTORS jumping on and off, that would be a justification in itself. But 40 years on from when Gregory arrived, nothing of the kind has ever happened. Oh yes, in the year 2525, if man is still alive ... We'll still be hearing the same old same old. Spot on Ingham. There will always be a new Flim-Flam man for the next generation of fools to be taken in. |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 19, 2013 12:01:13 GMT
Can we at least agree, Fernandes comes across nicer, and I'm sure is easier to work for than FLAVIO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2013 14:22:45 GMT
Can we at least agree, Fernandes comes across nicer, and I'm sure is easier to work for than FLAVIO Totally agree with you & I hope he keeps his word at least for next season when we have high wages & prem rejects that no one wants!!..........Maybe he could pay a few of em off & them I'll like him even more than I do now!!! His hearts in the right place at least!!! Tango & the poison dwarf had no hearts or souls!! |
|
|
|
Post by scarletpimple on Mar 19, 2013 16:10:40 GMT
Trouble is he does not put any real substance into these messages, and as far as a new 45k stadium in the championship, no thanks, training ground taking forever to get off the ground, and perhaps he could tell us about his mistakes then we might know......that he knows what he's talking about.
Cos i sure the hell dont.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 19, 2013 20:08:56 GMT
Er, thanks, alfaranger for admitting that you, too, remember Zager and Evans.
What a relief! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Bushman on Mar 19, 2013 20:19:16 GMT
Er, thanks, alfaranger for admitting that you, too, remember Zager and Evans. What a relief! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by blatantfowl on Mar 19, 2013 21:20:03 GMT
I stand with Lone, Ingham and Alfa. But then you probably knew that already.
Relegation is no longer the issue. It's the debt, Tony. THE DEBT! I am not fooled by this rancid charade. Tickling the fancy of fans desperate for success while you strip the assets of the club.
Clear the debt....and I will believe you.
Make your plans for the stadium clear....that it will be built within the means of the club and owned by the club.....and I will believe in you.
Run the club in a way that is a model for have all clubs should be run. Do it within the clubs own turnover. Tweet about how proud you are that you run the club properly.....and I will back you.
Otherwise, just leave please but do it in a way that does not mean we go out of existence.
|
|
|
|
Post by luckycharms on Mar 20, 2013 7:09:27 GMT
Fernandes won't learn enough to be the Football chairman you deserve. Despite his flamboyant claims, he does not micromanage any of his businesses.
He is far too busy jet-setting around the world, leaving the daily running of the club to Beard and the rest.
In terms of Beard, Fernandes needs him to peddle the new stadium venue when it gets built. But he is daft if he thinks he can go on as before. With Beard running the business side and lacking any nous regarding football culture and whoever the manager (previously Hughes) becoming the defacto Director of Football just because he was the manager and left to run the football side with little supervision.
Nah, if he's learnt anything it's to get a footballing man he can work with to run the footballing side.
Also I read how fans are unhappy with the way CEO Beard has dealt with complaints. Do what Air Asia travellers with a gripe do. Complain directly to Fernandes on Twitter. He doesn't know what the problems are until someone tweets him. I doubt CEO Beard tells him that the Club's interaction with the fans has been lacking for example.
People have complained about ticketing, baggage, queues etcetc and he's responded. So keep tweeting about the water pressure and how non-responsive the Club have been in terms of fan concerns. He won't ban anyone on Twitter for making a legitimate complaint.
|
|
|
|
Post by nomar on Mar 20, 2013 7:57:58 GMT
Yes, but if we want Tony to stop stuffing it up then he absolutely has got to stop spending and dreaming of glory. No, he just has to spend wisely and more prudently. That might include paying up a few contracts. Beard's would be good start. What should he dream of? Mid table mediocracy? My point being we like him because he is like a fan not because he's proven to be a good chairman. We tried not spending once, though not out of choice and were left with Nardiello up front and Barker and Curtis in defence. Surely that's a lesson learnt. I just think he needs to 'invest' more wisely and slowly over time and build a squad rather than this mad rush that has been his downfall since his arrival. Yes, nothing wrong in spending but spend wisely. We have spent on the wrong kind of players. The fear is that if we go down he will spend more money on the wrong kind of players again in a bid for instant promotion. As for dreams of success they should match realistic goals the club and fans agree on. Most QPR fans don't want the club turned into a global brand with a 45k seater arena and real fans pushed out to make room for corporate boxes and plastic fans paying to see their fellow countrymen in a hoops shirt (preferably not a Lotto one). If his dreams include mid table every season in the Prem, occasional cup run and run club like Nothing and Swansea then that's a different matter........ |
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Mar 20, 2013 8:47:25 GMT
No, he just has to spend wisely and more prudently. That might include paying up a few contracts. Beard's would be good start. What should he dream of? Mid table mediocracy? My point being we like him because he is like a fan not because he's proven to be a good chairman. We tried not spending once, though not out of choice and were left with Nardiello up front and Barker and Curtis in defence. Surely that's a lesson learnt. I just think he needs to 'invest' more wisely and slowly over time and build a squad rather than this mad rush that has been his downfall since his arrival. Yes, nothing wrong in spending but spend wisely. We have spent on the wrong kind of players. The fear is that if we go down he will spend more money on the wrong kind of players again in a bid for instant promotion. As for dreams of success they should match realistic goals the club and fans agree on. Most QPR fans don't want the club turned into a global brand with a 45k seater arena and real fans pushed out to make room for corporate boxes and plastic fans paying to see their fellow countrymen in a hoops shirt (preferably not a Lotto one). If his dreams include mid table every season in the Prem, occasional cup run and run club like Nothing and Swansea then that's a different matter........ Substitute the word 'dreams' for 'aims' and that's a fair comment. You can't temper dreams but at the same time unrealistic aims will leave you where we are now. I'm not so sure that the majority of the fan base don't want to be a top 4 side in a 45,000 seated stadium, they just know that it's unrealistic to say it's going to happen soon. Which is hopefully what TF is learning, he's just having to learn it the hard way due to his, the board's and the CEO's lack of experience and arrogant coupled with ignorant view of football. It would be great if the debts were turned into equity in the close season and the squad trimmed, though I believe the board will look to get back up straight away and chase the Premiership money by further 'investment', absorbing the losses into the club's accounts. I'm not worried about TF and Tune leaving, they're here to take the stadium and for the chance to build a bigger, multi purpose one where they can charge us to play, whilst spearheading their worldwide PR branding and no other club offer's them the potential geographically after being squeezed out of the West Ham deal. What gets me are these statements full of platitudes and bullshit, all the while ripping off the fans whilst providing a diminished match day experience in order to maximise short term profit, in direct contradiction to the massive overspending on a dysfunctional squad, backed up by lies such as there is no debt, we respect the fans (ask the ex-OSC committee about that one) and how they will respect the history of the club. They have the time to turn it around but statements like this do not address any of our actual problems and are almost a veiled threat that unless we shut up and put with them they could always leave us in the shit. |
|
|
|
Post by nomar on Mar 20, 2013 16:48:54 GMT
My post should have said being run like Norwich and Swansea, not Nothing and Swansea.
I think you've rumbled Uncle Tony's game there, Mark. QPR need owners who love the club and respect the fans. Sadly, as benevolent as Tony seems he still has am agenda for the club and the fans are just punters there to hand their shillings over every week.
In some ways at least staying up better justifies the kind of expenditures we have made thus far.
Ingham was right in saying why not just remove the debt.
|
|
|
|
Post by toboboly on Mar 20, 2013 16:57:57 GMT
They better not build a stadium and not make the club the owners. Coventry anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 22, 2013 6:40:50 GMT
On the other hand, elsewhere, as Tony Tweets today...
The success of airasia is down to its startegy. Clear focussed. And we delivered what we said. Dividend after 10 years. 6 airlines. One aircraft the A 320. Lowest cost airline in the world. That's the key. Lopwest cost always wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bushman on Mar 22, 2013 8:12:52 GMT
On the other hand, elsewhere, as Tony Tweets today... The success of airasia is down to its startegy. Clear focussed. And we delivered what we said. Dividend after 10 years. 6 airlines. One aircraft the A 320. Lowest cost airline in the world. That's the key. Lopwest cost always wins. I'm looking forward to a time when he has a clear focused strategy that he can deliver for us. |
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Mar 22, 2013 8:15:08 GMT
On the other hand, elsewhere, as Tony Tweets today... The success of airasia is down to its startegy. Clear focussed. And we delivered what we said. Dividend after 10 years. 6 airlines. One aircraft the A 320. Lowest cost airline in the world. That's the key. Lopwest cost always wins. I'm looking forward to a time when he has a clear focused strategy that he can deliver for us. he has bman...............but it means losing our club.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jon Doeman on Mar 22, 2013 8:27:53 GMT
Wonder what the lads sniping at Tony, make of Leeds & Blackburn ownership issues at the moment? We don't seem too bad off, compared to those.
|
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Mar 22, 2013 8:32:04 GMT
Wonder what the lads sniping at Tony, make of Leeds & Blackburn ownership issues at the moment? We don't seem too bad off, compared to those. QPR are lucky to have those fans that 'snipe' jon.  |
|
|
|
Post by saphilip on Mar 22, 2013 8:41:03 GMT
If I had to rate the various chairmen who have been in charge since I have followed Rangers then my rankings would be;
Top of the very good scale - Jim Gregory despite his numerous mistakes he did far more good than harm.
Good - as limited as it was I would place the Bill Power era in the good category.
On the other end of the scale, the Poison Trio of Flabio, the Two Bit Former Agent and the Poison Dwarf sit on on the catastrophic part of the scale.
Chris "The Greatest R's fan in the World" Wright would sit in the appalling category, while Dick Thompson would sit in the very bad category. The less said about the Blackburn era the better.
So where does TF fit in my scale? To be truthful I see a lot of good points but more than a fair share of bad points. In my opinion he sits in the middle - neither very bad, but nor is he very good. I don't think he is the total train wreck that many of his critics would have us believe, but I don't think he is his way to QPR Sainthood either.
Talk is very cheap - I will believe his commitment when I see it, although I'm in no hurry to write him off either.
I suppose watching the reigns of both Wright & then Briatore destroying my initial optimism in double quick time has made me a lot more cynical regarding TF's reign - and perhaps unfairly so.
I guess like many QPR fans I'm playing the waiting game and seeing what will happen if (when?) QPR do go down. I think that is where we all discover the difference between talk and action.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 22, 2013 8:41:17 GMT
I'm a mixed message!
Not gullible about his goals; think he's not done a great job...But think he's the best we're going to get - and there are many out there who would be far worse.
Of course Interesting: Would we prefer a (slightly) saner Briatore, not so nice...but if he was actually effective...or a clearly nicer and optimistic/ebulient Tony Fernandes..?
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 22, 2013 8:52:41 GMT
Anyway I just hope that Tony continues to love me - even if I occasionally offer a few words of constructive criticism  |
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Mar 22, 2013 9:04:25 GMT
Anyway I just hope that Tony continues to love me - even if I occasionally offer a few words of constructive criticism be careful, any criticism at tony and he might just take his ball and go home.  |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 22, 2013 9:27:14 GMT
Anyway I just hope that Tony continues to love me - even if I occasionally offer a few words of constructive criticism be careful, any criticism at tony and he might just take his ball and go home. I guess just have to watch and wait #Stability (But unlike you Maudes, despite anything I may have said or continue to say, I still think Fernandes is better than any plausible alternative...And so it's more a matter of "Reform from within" than Oust.... - as if have a choice anyway) |
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Mar 22, 2013 9:40:35 GMT
So Maude, whom would you like running the show then? Whilst TF has made some mistakes, at least he has outshone the 3 Aimgos prior to his arrival. Not convinced at all about Beard but who knows?
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 22, 2013 11:23:01 GMT
Lowest cost always wins?
Presumably that is why he reduced QPR's sky-high tickets to the lowest in the Premiership. And is keeping wages down, too. Like his airline, the losses are soaring.
Such careful economy.
What does he think the resemblance between a football club and an airline actually IS?
Are airlines entered in a competition? Do they have supporters who identify with the airline even when it is rubbish, and follow it all their lives, watching its performances on TV - along with the 'global audience' that presumably gawps at, er, aeroplanes taking off (and landing too!) - when they can't get to the airport to cheer them on, I mean.
Do competing airlines fly down, land on the opposing airline's premises, and crash into them when they're trying to take off? Ask a striker what happens to HIM when he does that.
Does the linesman always miss it. And the ref tell them to ignore the wreckage, disregard the criminal activity, and fly on?
His poxy airline couldn't even WORK if it was in any kind of competition, let alone 'return a dividend' after 10 years. In the carpet slippers world of business, where 'competition' isn't competition at all, everyone is a winner just because they say they are, and nothing is ever wrong because even governments daren't 'interfere with the market', so there is no built-in corrective to any of the epidemic delusions that characterise worlds built on the pretence and disinformation of advertising, no wonder the reality of football shows them up for the ineffectual posers they are.
In football, attempting to perform the most elementary footballing task invites an elbow in the mouth, a knee in the groin, or a boot in the guts.
But when you lose, your loyal supporters are always there. Particularly when you lose, I might add.
Still, it must make sense. They're all still trying to do it, after 20 years and more, and Ferguson is still running rings round the lot of them. Still at the old ground. Still winning, even with inferior squads, in the opinion of some, and with a £1 billion debt that PREVENTS them signing better players.
|
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Mar 22, 2013 13:36:52 GMT
So Maude, whom would you like running the show then? Whilst TF has made some mistakes, at least he has outshone the 3 Aimgos prior to his arrival. Not convinced at all about Beard but who knows? its very hard for me to fight a anti fernandes case, he has made promises, investment and overtures that are very pleasing to the fans. i doubt if any of these are lies or embellishments. my concern, (and its what i believe will happen) is that if he is successful in his business plan the identity of the club would be erased. i dont want to walk into a 45'000 seater stadia surrounded by saturday shoppers eating pizza's or going bowling, nor do i want to hear the clicks of the camera lenses over the chants of the fans. it wont make us anymore prosperous as a team, it wont make us win any more trophys, it wont even gaurantee us premiership stability. so why want it? , so we can brag about our shiney stadium? so we can see our club badge on the side of a fleet of planes? so we can be recgonised globally? so we can say we are financially stable?. why want these things if you want success on the pitch? we have just as much chance of being a great side without all the glitz and glamour. it takes one good manager who fortune favours, it takes luck. if there was a formula then what team would be at the bottom of the pile? i dont want instant success, but i do want my club. i take my chances as a supporter with what we have now, with our own ground and identity. rather than what we wont have 10 years from now. who can achieve this other than tf? answer is anyone can, we have our battles with the wrights, thompsons, briatore's of this world, but they are gone and we are not, so bring on the next one, but lets not get fooled , i know a villain by the black cloak he wears, all of t f's predeccesors wore it , makes it easier to spot them, and deal with them. tony wears one that is made from gold |
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Mar 22, 2013 14:29:04 GMT
Not many fans want a new 45k seater, and the proposed training facilites etc, at this stage are pie in the sky, we all know that. The problem for Fernandes is that 99% of QPR fans are realists. We believe when we see. And we are not seeing anything as such.
To his credit and the clubs spiriling debt, new faces of an alleged higher quality have been brought in. Some are definatly an improvement. That some are under performers is not really his fault, but can be used as a learning experience.
I believe he has the club incorporated into his scheme with Air Asia. But as we all know, an airline and a football club are two different beasts. The of course there's the social impacts. A football club - in our case, QPR, is very much a part of the local community. It's not just football, its all sorts of social items. An Airline isn't.
I think with the team losing he is quite genuine about his feelings. I don't believe it's all about the financial ramifications should we drop down a division.
I would like the club to make some sort of announcement as to whether or not we are in 89 million pounds of debt or if as suggested earlier in the season, we are realitively debt free.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Mar 22, 2013 16:32:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Mar 22, 2013 16:54:28 GMT
New stadiums bigger ones, better owners? Well, we lead the FA in new stadiums. Thirteen places I
think. Fortunately my cousin John Bloom who tried to takeover the team, wasnt as succesful as Paladini,
But he did suceed along with Alec Stock in moving team to White City which held 80,000. You stood around the perimeter in front of 75,000 empty seats.
That was in 1961 or two. Not the first time weve played in what was White City, either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bushman on Mar 22, 2013 17:25:17 GMT
New stadiums bigger ones, better owners? Well, we lead the FA in new stadiums. Thirteen places I think. Fortunately my cousin John Bloom who tried to takeover the team, wasnt as succesful as Paladini, But he did suceed along with Alec Stock in moving team to White City which held 80,000. You stood around the perimeter in front of 75,000 empty seats. That was in 1961 or two. Not the first time weve played in what was White City, either. Bloom tried to take over in 1963-64 and had nothing to do with the move to White City in 1962. qprreport.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=20133 |
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 23, 2013 11:47:57 GMT
Must have a good look at those links. The White City .... a terrible experience. Amazing place, like the mausoleum of a dead civilisation.
My concern about investors isn't really the individual, as such, so it doesn't matter whether he is a good bloke, or a real supporter.
It is the type - the investor's role - because that is what defines him. Not his personality. We are not Rs supporters because we have this or that type of personality, but because we have this or that type of commitment.
Even if a person is also a supporter, being an owner defines them, as far as the Club is concerned, in terms of their 'investment'.
It is that difference which is important. A chairman might be a decent bloke, generally speaking. But in the machinery of the game, he is a particular kind of cog, and the cog works in the way all the other cogs of the same type work.
So the differences in personality or in the Clubs they supported between Wright or Gregory, Ecclestone or Thompson or Fernandes, aren't relevant.
What does the damage is the way the machinery of investment works at that point. To the investor, even if he thinks he is putting his money 'in', it is designed to come 'out'. And it will come out.
If you want some fish and chips, and you wait at a bus stop, you'll get a bus, not a cod. Not because the bus driver is evil, but because the chippie is what it is, and the bus - and the stop - are what they are.
It is his own money that the investor is steering, and that he is holding on to. That is why it is borrowed. And that is why, if he doesn't write the loans off, but 'converts them to equity', they still remain a threat.
Because he wants the money 'back'. If he spends money with the best of intentions which leaves the Club £100 million in debt - while he is gone with his money and any windfall profits on top of it - while a less sentimental character, an Ecclestone type, only leaves the Club £50 million in debt - while caring nothing about it at all - the damage is £100 million, and the investor's feelings are neither here nor there.
Especially when HE is GONE, but his LOSSES REMAIN.
The same applies to managers and players. WE are sentimental about the Club. Our sentiments may be what make us supporters, but they aren't support per se. If our support damaged the Club and caused it to lose millions, it wouldn't be much in the way of 'support', however passionately we felt about QPR winning and that QPR was our Club.
It is the effect - the consequences for the Club - that matters, because, to us, it is the Club's interests that our support represents.
Whereas the Chairman, whoever he is, represents his own.
That is why we leave our money in, and sustain the loss ourselves. To the Club's benefit. While he, whoever he is, does all he can to get 'his' money out.
And leaves the Club to take the hit.
|
|
