|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 25, 2014 10:07:24 GMT
Of course we'll never know if Bhatia/Mittal had taken over. Perhaps a little less ambitious; a little more grounded. All Counterfactual History Summed up by Robert Frost's "The Road Not Taken Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel both And be one traveler, long I stood And looked down one as far as I could To where it bent in the undergrowth; Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, Because it was grassy and wanted wear; Though as for that the passing there Had worn them really about the same, And both that morning equally lay In leaves no step had trodden black. Oh, I kept the first for another day! Yet knowing how way leads on to way, I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173536 |
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Sept 25, 2014 11:42:05 GMT
Hi Maudes, good to see you back mate. Loving your handiwork!  |
|
|
|
Post by wrenboy61 on Sept 25, 2014 13:39:00 GMT
Welcome back Maude....
Could be worse!!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2014 22:06:30 GMT
I dont. he is a flim flam man Welcome back...you're talking bollox  and you copy and paste bollox |
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 25, 2014 22:37:24 GMT
Welcome back...you're talking bollox and you copy and paste bollox indeed Maude but its other people's bollox not my own |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2014 23:12:16 GMT
and you copy and paste bollox indeed Maude but its other people's bollox not my own link please  |
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Sept 26, 2014 1:26:18 GMT
Suddenly I remember my cousins name, John Bloom. Probbly the worst owner we have had.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Sept 26, 2014 11:57:00 GMT
Give me strength. They WILL write off most of the debt? What! The debt they told us we didn't have?
Fine. When they've written it off, we can start trusting them.
I'll be interested to see whether the Club has the sense to hang on to Loftus Road until we've discovered just HOW brilliant Fernandes is, and the team's football.
When we're playing brilliantly year in year out, with 40,000 clamouring for tickets, we'll know they've got what it takes. When he is attracting 'world class talent' sufficient to make QPR viable at that level - Champions League, I take it, another interesting promise of the Mittal era that wasn't fulfilled - we'll have the evidence that the CLUB has what it takes.
Why not? If it's such a piece of cake to attract talent of that kind, and produce football to that standard, no-one ELSE is preventing him from doing it.
If we stay at LR, Old Oak can pay its way on the back of all the other activities clamouring to make use of a facility which is, after all, designed with them in mind.
Then, debt-free, with 40,000 supporters, and an asset worth £200 million, we'll be laughing. If QPR owns the Ground, that is. Then QPR it will get the revenue from all the other activities. If it is a tenant, it is reasonable to suppose that it will get nothing whatsoever from any of them.
The Club will simply pay for building and operating the stadium, someone else will own it, pocket all the revenue at no cost to themselves, and the Club will be left with nothing.
Except Fernandes's losses, which he hasn't written off, any more than Bhatia did.
Perhaps we could get a bank to let us have a mortgage. Taken out on the basis that the Club will own something itself at the end of it all.
Fernandes can tell the bankers all about that world class talent, how well we've been doing since he arrived, and that we only have losses of £178 million and nothing to show for it.
If the Club had profits of £178 million, that might be another thing. If he had earned the money to PAY for a big new stadium, likewise. If he was attracting world class talent and soaring support to fill the ground, that would be very interesting indeed.
He might even look like a winner. But a loser on the pitch and off it looks like a loser.
On the pitch and off it.
Straightforward enough to change things. Just win, and go on winning. And if he must squander money on his own disastrous mistakes, why doesn't he squander his own?
Or doesn't he believe all the stuff he expects US to swallow?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ashdown_Ranger on Sept 26, 2014 12:59:38 GMT
Promises of Champions League football made ‘in the Mittal era’ (and, by implication, tarring TF with the same brush)?
That was a comment made by Briatore, who was possibly one of the worst owners we’ve had. We were promoted despite him, not because of him – and only after he was sidelined following Renault Crashgate and Warnock was allowed a period of interference-free stability.
Do you think TF believes the same? I guess you don't - in which case, why bother making a comment like that?
Other than Briatore's ludicrous comments, I don't know anyone else who's suggested anything of the sort.
True - but the club would never be allowed to develop in order to approach anywhere near that point if they followed your philosophy of fear and mistrust - it requires a leap of faith.
I think he (and other shareholders) are doing just that. They surely have no chance of recovering the £177m by pulling the plug, and the club isn't saleable at anything remotely approaching that amount.
TF has said that he and the shareholders would write off the debt, or a large part of it. I don't know enough about club/business finances to know the mechanics or how/when that might happen.
Maybe I'll end up looking a prize, naive tw*t if they bale out and leave QPR hanging out to dry.
But until then, I'll take them at their word.
|
|
|
|
Post by dylanpresman on Sept 26, 2014 14:43:23 GMT
I dont. he is a flim flam man Do you see my hand up? Honestly, I cannot think of a better Chairman in the last 30 years. Name one. --Thompson? --Wright? --Blackburn? --BP? (good bloke, for sure, but not enough resources to move the club forward) --Paladini? If you can't name a single Chairman that was better for the club than Tony, then the problem is probably with your thinking/expectations! |
|
|
|
Post by timewaster on Sept 26, 2014 14:43:30 GMT
Where is Harry Hill ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Sept 26, 2014 18:15:49 GMT
Ultimately it comes down to his achievements. Its all very nice of him to go on his pub visits on match days and his friendly persona, but what has he achieved? Whilst lots has been spent on trying to get a new training ground we are still a long way off leaving Harlington for a new permanent training facilities and the new stadium is still nothing more than talk and yet more monies spent on its viability, architects and lawyers. Add to that the colossal financial losses made during his tenure and it does not paint a pretty picture on balance.
|
|
|
|
Post by dylanpresman on Sept 26, 2014 21:39:51 GMT
Ultimately it comes down to his achievements. Its all very nice of him to go on his pub visits on match days and his friendly persona, but what has he achieved? Whilst lots has been spent on trying to get a new training ground we are still a long way off leaving Harlington for a new permanent training facilities and the new stadium is still nothing more than talk and yet more monies spent on its viability, architects and lawyers. Add to that the colossal financial losses made during his tenure and it does not paint a pretty picture on balance. If you are going to say that he has to be judged on his achievements, then you have to give a reasonable amount of time. Long term plans take a long term to mature. 3 years does not constitute long-term. Of course the stadium is just talk. It takes years, perhaps decades, for a development project of that scope to be completed. You can't have it both ways. |
|
|
|
Post by Hogan on Sept 26, 2014 22:59:42 GMT
Ultimately it comes down to his achievements. Its all very nice of him to go on his pub visits on match days and his friendly persona, but what has he achieved? Whilst lots has been spent on trying to get a new training ground we are still a long way off leaving Harlington for a new permanent training facilities and the new stadium is still nothing more than talk and yet more monies spent on its viability, architects and lawyers. Add to that the colossal financial losses made during his tenure and it does not paint a pretty picture on balance. If you are going to say that he has to be judged on his achievements, then you have to give a reasonable amount of time. Long term plans take a long term to mature. 3 years does not constitute long-term. Of course the stadium is just talk. It takes years, perhaps decades, for a development project of that scope to be completed. You can't have it both ways. How much time is a 'reasonable' amount of time Dylan. And is that a reasonable amount of time purely because he is Chairman and majority owner? If he was the Chief Exec or other employee how much time would be given or would he indeed still be in employment at the club? What was going through Tf's mind when he considered letting Warnock go, or when he was considering giving Hughes more time after getting it wrong with Warnock, and what was/is going through his mind when he considers extending Redknapps contract, ok but why now? Is it that he fears he may lose Redknapp? If it all about timing, then I fear TF is hugely unlucky perhaps because he keeps getting the big ones wrong. The OP's question was about likeability, so yea he doesn't refer to us fans as £20 supporters, he dreams of us filling a huge new stadium but at what cost? |
|
|
|
Post by sharky on Sept 27, 2014 1:16:23 GMT
Simple answer to a simple question. My hand's up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 27, 2014 8:36:21 GMT
Shouldnt "like" with "doing a good job"
There's also in isolation - and compared to other QPR Chairmen
And in isolation and compared to other Football Chairmen current and past
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2014 18:08:56 GMT
There you go andy me ol mucker |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2014 18:12:34 GMT
I dont. he is a flim flam man Do you see my hand up? Honestly, I cannot think of a better Chairman in the last 30 years. Name one. --Thompson? --Wright? --Blackburn? --BP? (good bloke, for sure, but not enough resources to move the club forward) --Paladini? If you can't name a single Chairman that was better for the club than Tony, then the problem is probably with your thinking/expectations! can you provide figures of debt/losses of all those chairmen whilst QPR where under their tenure? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2014 18:25:24 GMT
I would take back any of those previous owners bar paladini who never owned QPR IN THE FIRST PLACE.
i would take them back because as history shows, we are to strong for them as a support.
they all wanted to change/strip QPR, but they never, they are gone cos we got rid. Cos we didnt play their game.
'Tony' as his close mates call him, is different. He has you all thinking of how BIG QPR can be, he has you hanging on to promises that will kill the identity of our club.
im not against moving on, im against flim flam to hoodwink the fans to profit his and his investors ambitions outside of QPR.
QPR are a vehicle to their goal, if it breaks down they will quick fix just to get them there and then scrap it.
|
|
|
|
Post by luckycharms on Sept 27, 2014 21:09:26 GMT
If you are going to say that he has to be judged on his achievements, then you have to give a reasonable amount of time. Long term plans take a long term to mature. 3 years does not constitute long-term. Of course the stadium is just talk. It takes years, perhaps decades, for a development project of that scope to be completed. You can't have it both ways. How much time is a 'reasonable' amount of time Dylan. And is that a reasonable amount of time purely because he is Chairman and majority owner? If he was the Chief Exec or other employee how much time would be given or would he indeed still be in employment at the club? What was going through Tf's mind when he considered letting Warnock go, or when he was considering giving Hughes more time after getting it wrong with Warnock, and what was/is going through his mind when he considers extending Redknapps contract, ok but why now? Is it that he fears he may lose Redknapp? If it all about timing, then I fear TF is hugely unlucky perhaps because he keeps getting the big ones wrong. The OP's question was about likeability, so yea he doesn't refer to us fans as £20 supporters, he dreams of us filling a huge new stadium but at what cost? As a fellow Malaysian I am all for Fernandes and think his moderate liberal views and material success are, despite a few flaws, good for Malaysia in an economic and social sense. So I wish him all the best in his business dealings, including the success of QPR. He's a typical post-colonial anglophile who got lucky, got the ear of the then PM, and made a fortune. But, as many have pointed out, being a football chairman just doesn't seem to suit him. He never fired anyone the way he did Warnock for example, the only time he ever did so before was all hush-hush and involved shifting the particular individual to board level. Even then, Fernandes never did it in person, nor did he do so with Hughes, which tells a lot about Fernandes's character. His own personal business philosophy and style which involves primarily building connections, networking, and delegation of authority mean that he is completely adrift when it comes to football. It's great if all your employees are prepared to work together for the greater good of the company and therefore their own plate. But in football with contracts that are not beholden to results, that is not always the case. After three years Fernandes still hasn't yet admitted to himself that delegating without strict scheduled supervision while he jet-sets around the world is not the best way to run a football club where things change daily (or every 45 minutes on match days). That depending on players and management personnel with iron clad individual contracts, that are not dependent on getting the best results for the club, mean you'd need to keep them on a tighter leash and be more proactive in the operations of the club. That finally players and management are not really beholden or loyal to anyone but themselves, and for Fernandes to be chummy with Warnock, then embrace Hughes, then Redknapp without calling them to account when they screw up - until it is far too late, is a recipe for repeating the same mistakes over and over again. Also his massive ego. That's why he wants to be chairman despite being so poor at it. He's deluded if he thinks that 'sold his house to finance Air Asia' story is ever treated as credible back home. |
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Sept 30, 2014 11:33:28 GMT
I agree that it is good thing to wait, Ashdown. I am happy to wait to praise Fernandes until I see something worth praising him for. And it is absurd to suppose that a preference for honesty and excellence, talent and know-how constitutes 'fear and mistrust'.
It isn't my fault that other Clubs and other supporters with different managers and other chairmen are enjoying the good performances and results while we are enduring the bad ones.
If we WERE playing brilliantly, or getting outstanding results, it would be absurd to interpret our excellence as some kind of incipient failure. Likewise, it is absurd to represent failure as some kind of excellence-in-waiting.
Excellence, brilliance, winning, that IS how the Club will develop. If the Club put its faith in talent and know-how, and set about identifying WHO has the nous to put those things in place, or how the Club might develop them from within, then we would have something to go on.
It is merely good eyesight that tells supporters that Redknapp, Fernandes and the players aren't doing very well. They may or may not have conspired together to be so ineffectual, but that isn't anyone else's fault.
I don't say they won't be brilliant in the future, or need a much bigger ground than 40,000, which seems to be the wrong size for any number of reasons. But Fernandes has nothing to do with it. If he is to be believed, he has nothing to do with the development at all, which makes me wonder why he so often seems like the chief spokesman for the whole enterprise.
And I certainly think it is reasonable to ask whether Mittal MIGHT be a common denominator, since he is what links a couple of regimes together, and he is thought by some to be behind the stadium development. If he is so influential - and his enormous wealth might be a reason, or it might not - then it might be his prompting which is behind Fernandes's ever more confused pronouncements, as it might have been behind Briatore's apparently empty reference to QPR in the top four.
If we can speculate that Fernandes knows what he's doing in the absence of any evidence to suggest that, we can speculate freely about who may be pulling his strings.
If it isn't all going to be a piece of cake, nothing wrong in questioning it. If it is, nothing wrong in asking to see some evidence of the excellence of the set-up here.
The long term is the really hard thing. A brief flourish is what most Clubs can manage. There are just so many variables out of a specific club's control. Even the top four struggle to make that last crucial 'leap' to the top, and to winning the Champions League.
But it isn't a leap of faith. Their leaps are based on the reality of their punching power and the talent at their disposal to make it effective.
We don't have to be loyal to Fernandes, he has his family and employees and mates for that. Supporters are loyal to the Club. All of them, whether they give a toss about 'Fernandes' or not.
But, hey ho, we wouldn't be very interesting to listen to if we all thought exactly the same thing. Luckily, that doesn't usually happen. Not until they're found out, of course.
Then no-one will touch them with a bargepole. Good listening to you mate, more please!
|
|
bowles
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,939
|
Post by bowles on Sept 30, 2014 16:18:16 GMT
I LOVE TO HATE HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  |
|
bowles
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,939
|
Post by bowles on Sept 30, 2014 16:18:50 GMT
I LOVE TO HATE HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by timewaster on Sept 30, 2014 18:11:46 GMT
I like TF but he is still learning
Would it be better for the club to be in the championship with less debt though ?
I dont know myself but Maude would certainly think so
|
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Sept 30, 2014 18:47:24 GMT
Like him or not, we are stuck with him. We almost got a draw v Soton. We most likely will almost stay in the Prem. then see what the FA does with our debt
if we almost go to the conference.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 1, 2014 8:37:58 GMT
I as much as anyone (more than most) "indulge" in nostalgia and "What Ifs"
But the point is that given our debt and Tony Fernandes in charge, what next - What if Fernandes left, would we be better off or worse off.
I'm not sure we'd be better off.
I suppose theoretically going into Administration, losing Loftus Road - but preserving our identity as a (VERY) little club ...
I'd always support QPR - but the numbers who would, would be in the diminishing thousands...and the next generation?
|
|
|
|
Post by wrenboy61 on Oct 1, 2014 15:00:12 GMT
I as much as anyone (more than most) "indulge" in nostalgia and "What Ifs" But the point is that given our debt and Tony Fernandes in charge, what next - What if Fernandes left, would we be better off or worse off. I'm not sure we'd be better off. I suppose theoretically going into Administration, losing Loftus Road - but preserving our identity as a (VERY) little club ... I'd always support QPR - but the numbers who would, would be in the diminishing thousands...and the next generation? That opens up a another side if TF decided to leave you've only got to look around Loftus Road during matches (unless sitting in the popular family enclosure) to realise the support is aging and with the local opposition finding it easy to attract young kids we really need to be in the Premier league to recruit the next generation of supporters. |
|
kilburnhoop
Dave Sexton
Every Ranger is a danger
Posts: 1,631
|
Post by kilburnhoop on Oct 1, 2014 15:18:47 GMT
Like him or not, he is the first chairman since 1967 to see rangers WIN! at Wembley. Who was our chairman in 67? i'm not old enough  |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Oct 1, 2014 18:15:18 GMT
Even if we LOVE TONY, I'm also interested in the long term future of QPR - in the post-Fernandes era.
Supposed he falls under the proverbial bus - as of course Bulstrode did...What then of our ownership?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bushman on Oct 1, 2014 21:26:05 GMT
Even if we LOVE TONY, I'm also interested in the long term future of QPR - in the post-Fernandes era. Supposed he falls under the proverbial bus - as of course Bulstrode did...What then of our ownership? Not so much under the bus, as under his mistress when he popped his clogs!!! |
|
