Who would own a football club...?

[stainrodisalegend]

Yes I know it is meant to be the ultimate toy for the billionaire who has everything, but actually if you are a Fernandes rather than an Abramovich I'm not so sure.

Reading through multiple threads on here fans want completely contradictory things.

We have one thread with people heaping blame on him for the £170m debt.

We also have multiple threads urging him to splash money on this or that player.

The excuse is "this time we are desperate". Well, we have been desperate ever other transfer window he has been here too, either to get promoted or avoid relegation.

We have been playing one long game of catch up ever since he arrived when we were promoted with an average Championship squad and one complete maverick and unreliable genius.

We say he was naive about Hughes and now we say he was naive about Redknapp - with justification imho.

But both appointments were overwhelmingly popular, as were all but a handful of signings.

They haven't worked out, we have made mistake after mistake, the board are naive, the coaching staff seemingly inept, the manager past retirement age with little obvious passion - all of that is true.

But rather as a fan base screaming and blaming can't we be big enough to admit we would have done much the same at each step of the way?

And now, admit it is actually an INCREDIBLY hard decision to stick or twist with no right answer?

[oldhoop]

Spot on!

[Olly]

Who would own a football club...?

1) Those who don't know what they're getting into.

2) Those who are rich enough to want a hobby.

3) Those who like the prestige and have the business acumen to run a top club.

[Kirill]

I would not spend a penny on a business process that I do not properly understand and cannot efficiently manage.

[QPRDave]

Yes I know it is meant to be the ultimate toy for the billionaire who has everything, but actually if you are a Fernandes rather than an Abramovich I'm not so sure.

Reading through multiple threads on here fans want completely contradictory things.

We have one thread with people heaping blame on him for the £170m debt.

We also have multiple threads urging him to splash money on this or that player.

The excuse is "this time we are desperate". Well, we have been desperate ever other transfer window he has been here too, either to get promoted or avoid relegation.

We have been playing one long game of catch up ever since he arrived when we were promoted with an average Championship squad and one complete maverick and unreliable genius.

We say he was naive about Hughes and now we say he was naive about Redknapp - with justification imho.

But both appointments were overwhelmingly popular, as were all but a handful of signings.

They haven't worked out, we have made mistake after mistake, the board are naive, the coaching staff seemingly inept, the manager past retirement age with little obvious passion - all of that is true.

But rather as a fan base screaming and blaming can't we be big enough to admit we would have done much the same at each step of the way?

And now, admit it is actually an INCREDIBLY hard decision to stick or twist with no right answer?

Great post .....I get so confused....posters as you say blame Arry, then Beard, then Tony....

[Kirill]

Great post .....I get so confused....posters as you say blame Arry, then Beard, then Tony....

I blame everyone, it is easier to cope with failure that way.

[surrey_hoop]

Yes I know it is meant to be the ultimate toy for the billionaire who has everything, but actually if you are a Fernandes rather than an Abramovich I'm not so sure.

Reading through multiple threads on here fans want completely contradictory things.

We have one thread with people heaping blame on him for the £170m debt.

We also have multiple threads urging him to splash money on this or that player.
The excuse is "this time we are desperate". Well, we have been desperate ever other transfer window he has been here too, either to get promoted or avoid relegation.

We have been playing one long game of catch up ever since he arrived when we were promoted with an average Championship squad and one complete maverick and unreliable genius.

We say he was naive about Hughes and now we say he was naive about Redknapp - with justification imho.

But both appointments were overwhelmingly popular, as were all but a handful of signings.

They haven't worked out, we have made mistake after mistake, the board are naive, the coaching staff seemingly inept, the manager past retirement age with little obvious passion - all of that is true.

But rather as a fan base screaming and blaming can't we be big enough to admit we would have done much the same at each step of the way?

And now, admit it is actually an INCREDIBLY hard decision to stick or twist with no right answer?

As I think you alluded to, one created the other - we spent a lot of money on players (hence the debt), but they were not of the required ability (hence the need to keep spending.) We have all but completely decided against any form of youth policy, so this has to be the way forward - where this transfer policy is concerned, we are now past the point of no return in the short term.

I just think about the likes of Swansea (who we came up with the first time) and Burnley....both have spent within their means, and neither came up with especially great sides. One thing they both have in common though are chairmen who are genuinely fans of the club (Jenkins, Morgan and the Swansea Supporters Trust make up 60% of the ownership of Swansea, whilst the Burnley owners are all from the North West and lifelong Burnley fans), have put their faith in young managers, and stay out of the public eye - basically, they are well run football clubs. I'm not sure we can say the same of Fernandes. If run properly, a football club can be a viable business, assuming the model is strong - QPR is not a strong business model at present, and is hemorrhaging money as a result......

[stainrodisalegend]

I bet if you looked back at the thread on swp signing most people - including me no doubt - were saying "cracking player, yet to live up to his potential, what a bargain only 2.5m" etc. Now look at the situation!

We all talk as if we are experts on on our finances but I for one have no idea of the risks re lost revenue of going down, likelyhood of fair play penalties verses cost of buying the players to stay up with chances of it working (fans like to be optimistic and say "if you invest the money we will stay up" but Tony must be looking at the 16m spent on mutch and sandro and thinking "have they earned us a single point?")

[surrey_hoop]

I bet if you looked back at the thread on swp signing most people - including me no doubt - were saying "cracking player, yet to live up to his potential, what a bargain only 2.5m" etc. Now look at the situation!

We all talk as if we are experts on on our finances but I for one have no idea of the risks re lost revenue of going down, likelyhood of fair play penalties verses cost of buying the players to stay up with chances of it working (fans like to be optimistic and say "if you invest the money we will stay up" but Tony must be looking at the 16m spent on mutch and sandro and thinking "have they earned us a single point?")

I don't think you need any form of expertise in economics to understand that financially we are a complete farce. Of course buying players to stay up is the aim - there is no substitute for being a part of the PL revenue stream. That said, it shouldn't be a question of "survive at all costs." The risks that you mention are obvious and severe. Gambling with the future of the club for a few seasons in the PL is suicidal, any way you look at it.

[stainrodisalegend]

As I think you alluded to, one created the other - we spent a lot of money on players (hence the debt), but they were not of the required ability (hence the need to keep spending.) We have all but completely decided against any form of youth policy, so this has to be the way forward - where this transfer policy is concerned, we are now past the point of no return in the short term.

I just think about the likes of Swansea (who we came up with the first time) and Burnley....both have spent within their means, and neither came up with especially great sides. One thing they both have in common though are chairmen who are genuinely fans of the club (Jenkins, Morgan and the Swansea Supporters Trust make up 60% of the ownership of Swansea, whilst the Burnley owners are all from the North West and lifelong Burnley fans), have faith in their manager, and stay out of the public eye. I'm not sure we can say the same of Fernandes. If run properly, a football club can be a viable business, assuming the model is strong - QPR is not a strong business model at present, and is hemorrhaging money as a result......

We all know the problems but they are a lot easier to identify than the solutions.

You want an owner who is a supporter? Well even when qpr wd have cost relative peanuts none came forward who had the money to transform qpr - we were close to going out of business and were desperate for investment.

A modern day jim gregory wd not have anything like enough to get qpr in the prem.

I agree it wd be lovely to be run like swansea but you have to compare like with like. The council basically gave swansea the land for a new stadium, it wd cost us a couple of hundred million in London.

[surrey_hoop]

We all know the problems but they are a lot easier to identify than the solutions.
You want an owner who is a supporter? Well even when qpr wd have cost relative peanuts none came forward who had the money to transform qpr - we were close to going out of business and were desperate for investment.

A modern day jim gregory wd not have anything like enough to get qpr in the prem.

I agree it wd be lovely to be run like swansea but you have to compare like with like. The council basically gave swansea the land for a new stadium, it wd cost us a couple of hundred million in London.

Isn't that what Philip Beard is for?

I don't think the solutions are all that difficult to identify in all honesty. Bringing in a youngish homegrown manager from the lower leagues with something to prove would be a start, as well as placing an onus on scouting young british players rather than buying mercenaries looking for a payday. From there, you spend the money saved on transfer fees to improve the youth system, and as result gradually lose the mentality that the only good players are the ones that Joorabachian or some other football agent reccommends to you. It worked for Southampton, why not for us? I can assure you that I'll finances would look much better in a matter of a few years following this approach.

[QPRDave]

We all know the problems but they are a lot easier to identify than the solutions.

You want an owner who is a supporter? Well even when qpr wd have cost relative peanuts none came forward who had the money to transform qpr - we were close to going out of business and were desperate for investment.

A modern day jim gregory wd not have anything like enough to get qpr in the prem.

I agree it wd be lovely to be run like swansea but you have to compare like with like. The council basically gave swansea the land for a new stadium, it wd cost us a couple of hundred million in London.

Summed up the situation perfectly stainrod in a couple of posts.
None of us know the situation,mindset or intention of the owners. It's a business end of the day, owners of most clubs are not fans, gone are the days the butcher, baker and
cobbler all joined together to run the local club.

[QPRDave]

Isn't that what Philip Beard is for?

I don't think the solutions are all that difficult to identify in all honesty. Bringing in a youngish homegrown manager from the lower leagues with something to prove would be a start, as well as placing an onus on scouting young british players rather than buying mercenaries looking for a payday. From there, you spend the money saved on transfer fees to improve the youth system, and as result gradually lose the mentality that the only good players are the ones that Joorabachian or some other football agent reccommends to you. It worked for Southampton, why not for us? I can assure you that I'll finances would look much better in a matter of a few years following this approach.

This obsession with youngish managers is doing my head in.....don't youngish managers f**k up then?...don't they get fired?...do they know everything?...f**kin ridiculous

[Kevin Mcleod]

This board has dome wonders for this club, they will write off the debt thats so clear. They have given us very good managers (on paper) and some brilliant players (on paper). We have been promoted twice cos of them and been given the best day of our footballing lives, otherwise we would probably be division one mid table for decades.
Its not their fault that we are qpr, and even great managers become cr ap overnight, and world class players become sunday league the second they pull on the hooped shirt.
Good job we are all used to it and realize it, but they didnt have a clue about the curse and have wasted fortunes trying to banish it.

[QPRDave]

This board has dome wonders for this club, they will write off the debt thats so clear. They have given us very good managers (on paper) and some brilliant players (on paper). We have been promoted twice cos of them and been given the best day of our footballing lives, otherwise we would probably be division one mid table for decades.
Its not their fault that we are qpr, and even great managers become cr ap overnight, and world class players become sunday league the second they pull on the hooped shirt.
Good job we are all used to it and realize it, but they didnt have a clue about the curse and have wasted fortunes trying to banish it.