Flashback: "There are no plans to change the logo"

[QPR Report]

I'll note, without comment, that it was published on April Fools Day

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

"The Masterplan" - QPR's Prospects and Plans According to QPR's Mittal Family Rep., Vice Chair, Amit Bhatit
-
Mail/This is London We are nothing like Chelsea, says QPR vice-chairman Bhatia as he reveals Rangers' masterplan

Amit Bhatia has outlined the Mittal family's masterplan to usher in a new era of success at Queens Park Rangers.

The Rangers vice-chairman, and son-in-law of billionaire owner Lakshmi Mittal, claimed that last week's £20million shirt sponsorship deal with Lotto Sport Italia is a signal of the club's intent to stop at nothing in their bid to become a Premier League powerhouse.

The key points include:

• No plans to move from Loftus Road "for now".

• The club will not "lose control" over spending because "we are nothing like Chelsea".

• QPR will remain "quintessentially English" and no names or badges will change. • Lakshmi will stay "as a fan rather than an owner" otherwise "he will not get involved unless it is necessary". • Missing out on promotion next season "would not be a failure".

Bhatia is the public face of the Mittal family's interest in QPR and is keen to allay fears among fans that the London-born Indian businessman will change the identity of the club and move away from their present ground.

"One of the most attractive things about this club is the stadium, so we have no desire to move from here at all," he said.

"If the day came where a move was warranted - and I guess that would be when the results were great, we get promoted and we need a 35,000-seat stadium - then, yes, maybe we'd explore it. But we don't need it today.

"Shareholders should not determine what a club looks like. QPR have a great history and a great tradition and for us to maintain that is of prime importance.

"Consequently, there are no plans to change the logo, club colours or stadium name.

"There is a need to ensure things are kept fundamentally English. If you look through the roster, there are mostly English players here and we like it that way."

Comparisons with Chelsea are inevitable. Mittal's estimated £26billion fortune dwarfs that of their more illustrious neighbour's owner and should they one day decide to move, the club could outbid Roman Abramovich for potential sites at Chelsea & Westminster Hospital, White City or Earls Court.

Mittal, the fourth-richest man in the world according to Forbes magazine, has lavish tendencies - Bhatia's wedding to Vanisha Mittal in June 2004 was reported to be the most expensive in history at a cost of £30m - but fans should not expect a similar approach to the club's finances. 

"We are nothing like Chelsea and we will not lose control over spending," said Bhatia. "The expenses involved with QPR are far smaller. The £20m deal will go a long way to making us profitable, as would promotion. 

"My father-in-law's involvement on an emotional level is already known. He is involved firstly as a fan. If and when something warrants his involvement with the media, he will get involved but, for now, he believes the best way to be involved is as a fan and not an owner."

With money comes expectation, but the club's officials insist the team are not under pressure to deliver immediate results.


"We started off by setting a three-year target for promotion," Bhatia added. "If we didn't get promoted in three years, I don't think it would be a failure. We would be disappointed, of course, but I am sure we are going to get there. 

"I don't think any of us has got into this to be second best. We have a specific plan and we will do anything it requires to get the club where we want them to be."

Workmen are at present relaying South Africa Road leading up to Rangers' stadium. Given Bhatia's confident blueprint for success, fans could be forgiven for thinking they will be paving it with gold.
qprreport.blogspot.com/2008/04/qprs-prospects-and-plans-according-to.html

[klr]

IMO The badge / logo thing has played a much bigger part in our loss of identity than people imagine.

For example, I dislike the new logo / badge so much that it just doesnt feel right for me to be wearing any of that new merchandise a lot of which I would have been all over a few years ago, but not with that dire new logo plastered unconvincingly & tackily on it & it was dire, tacky & unconvincing.

Give us our old one back, merchandising sales will go up a good 10 / 15 % IMO, people feel like they are mugging themselves off walking around with this new logo on them, its embarrassing.

[QPR Report]

And bump!

[ingham]

'Investors' have backed themselves into a corner by trying to style the Club as a business. It enables supporters to play a double game against them, rejecting the logo, or even the kit, in short, all the various 'marketing strategies because that sort of commercialism isn't what the Club is all about, and THEN rejecting it all again because, from a commercial point of view:

(a) it isn't working

(b) it isn't attractive

(c) it isn't intelligent

(d) it isn't profitable

(e) it isn't successful.

My guess is that they're being hit hard on ticket sales in precisely this fashion.

Supporters can treat the increases as an insult. And, at the same time, they can also refuse to buy because:

(1) they don't trust the board with their money

(2) the tickets/stuff is too expensive

(3) their money isn't being spent in the way they want it to be

(4) the quality is inferior

(5) the service is inferior.

That old mantra of 'investors' - 'it's our money, we can do what we like with it' - cuts both ways. When it's a question of our money, it's none of their business.

Football is hard. Much of what passes for 'business' is PR. How many products of this or that kind are out there on the market? And how many are the best? Probably only one in any category, if that.

But they all pretend to be the best. That pretence is a liability in football, where everyone's pretensions are put to the test, in a succession of one-off sudden-death encounters, with instant elimination for most of them in the Cups.

A bit of pazazz, and people desperate for something new may be fooled for a while. Notice how many rubbish pubs need a makeover every few years.

But in football, we want the same old same old, and that's all the authorities permit. Same number of players, same rules, one game after another, barely enough time to breathe in. Merely keeping going is a triumph in itself. Winning is beyond all but the very rarest individuals.

And that means trouble if it's all you've got. A coat of paint, a few gimmicks, pathetic errors of judgement like that repulsive tiger and the laughable 'badge'.

And because they're all devotees of the 'I believe in me' philosophy - quite the opposite of our 'we support the Club' approach - everything they do reflects appallingly on their judgement, sincerity, intelligence and capabilities.

Worse, the delusion that they're winners, that they're the toughest, the cleverest and the best in a competitive environment where at least 91 of the 92 Clubs won't win any given competition, will lead them to stick to their guns, carry on believing that they're right, and continue screwing things up without ever realising that they're doing anything wrong.

But I'm sure it will turn out all right in the end .