Call me stupid but WHY do Flav and Bernie

[Scarlet pimple]

There is a council ruling on our ground blocking any redevelopment other than sporting venue.

[rangerforevereastcote]

We'll see what happens come September as they have defaulted on the loan to themselves. I'd be keeping a sharp eye on the BBC land development as there is an obvious property deal here, where we get a new stadium on long lease with annual rent in amongst a hotel casino flats type complex and LR gets converted into Flats

see above comment ref bbc site

[haqpr1963]

own QPR?

From what I have read Bernie has limited interest in football, and supports Chelsea. Whereas Flav had never heard of QPR, in fact thought it was a restaurant.

Now you would never own a football club to make money, it just isn't going to happen, so why on earth are they involved?

No Idea about Bernie, heard he was outbid for Chelsea by Roman (and he would never go to Fulham as he doesn't meet the hight restrictions for the cheap seats.) So perhaps we were the cheap option (and as has been said the land alone must be very tempting).

As for Flavio, I eat a lot in an Italian in Putney. All of the Staff are hardcore footy fans from Italy and always laugh when they see me in the Hoops. Flavio was very interested in getting involved with a lot of the big clubs in Italy, but basically they wouldn't touch him with a bargepole.

If you are ever in Putney drop into Il Mascalzone, it even has a bit of a Hoops link as the 'Ammersmith 'Orses dad is a regular and always willing to talk about the club....

[Gerryhatrick]

Why are they involved? Bernie has already said, 'it's a business'
And business means money and profit, that is their only concern.
They will squeeze every last pound they can before passing it on at a profit.
Facts, as on wikipedia.
1. In 2007 BE paid £150k for 15%. FB bought 54% for £540k, so 69% total based on a £1m value.
2. They then loaned money to club to cover the (£18m at the time) debt. £10m ABC loan @ 10% interest pa meant they got their investment back in one year! New loan is @ 8.5% so still better than banks. Stadium land is used as insurance. Debt is now around £50m. Will the prem/TV money pay off some of the debt? Not while there's a personal profit to be had, why would they?
3. Bernie's £1m value (£150k investment) in 2007 is now worth £100m according to him, which would be an astonishing profit if he gets near this valuation.

If they were interested in the future welfare of the club, why charge these interest rates? the risk is eliminated with the stadium collaterale. Other chairmen provide interest free loans.

It's business, and they are ruthless.
How ruthless? Read a F1 book called 'The piranha club'

[rangerforevereastcote]

Why are they involved? Bernie has already said, 'it's a business'
And business means money and profit, that is their only concern.
They will squeeze every last pound they can before passing it on at a profit.
Facts, as on wikipedia.
1. In 2007 BE paid £150k for 15%. FB bought 54% for £540k, so 69% total based on a £1m value.
2. They then loaned money to club to cover the (£18m at the time) debt. £10m ABC loan @ 10% interest pa meant they got their investment back in one year! New loan is @ 8.5% so still better than banks. Stadium land is used as insurance. Debt is now around £50m. Will the prem/TV money pay off some of the debt? Not while there's a personal profit to be had, why would they?
3. Bernie's £1m value (£150k investment) in 2007 is now worth £100m according to him, which would be an astonishing profit if he gets near this valuation.

If they were interested in the future welfare of the club, why charge these interest rates? the risk is eliminated with the stadium collaterale. Other chairmen provide interest free loans.

It's business, and they are ruthless.
How ruthless? Read a F1 book called 'The piranha club'

so what about the 13mill a year they have pumped in to cover the losses? their current investmnet into rangers circa 50 mill, you thing our 14k gates paid for our squad these last few years?
they paid a million quid fo rit cos thats what it was worth cos of the debt

[jackbauerQPR]

They're still involved cause it is business gone wrong. They haven't had the chance to get enough money back yet cause nobody feels it's worth what Flavio and the dwarf have paid (in total costs).

[LeeCookFan]

own QPR?

From what I have read Bernie has limited interest in football, and supports Chelsea. Whereas Flav had never heard of QPR, in fact thought it was a restaurant.

Now you would never own a football club to make money, it just isn't going to happen, so why on earth are they involved?

They club will make a loss. However they purchased it for a low price, got it to a more prestigious position. They sell it for a much higher price and incur the running costs.

A lot like property redevelopment people buy sh1te, pay money to renovate, and sell for a profit.

[Gerryhatrick]

so what about the 13mill a year they have pumped in to cover the losses? their current investmnet into rangers circa 50 mill, you thing our 14k gates paid for our squad these last few years?
they paid a million quid fo rit cos thats what it was worth cos of the debt

By ''pumped in to cover the losses'' you mean 'bankrolled/loaned/invested' because their is a big difference between giving and lending.

The more they can lend to the club, the more interest they can earn.
Many of the losses are self inflicted. Loan interest on 37m @ 8.5% is more than £3m, multi-manager pay offs, C Club and VIP hospitality costs.

Cha-ching !!

[LeeCookFan]

By ''pumped in to cover the losses'' you mean 'bankrolled/loaned/invested' because their is a big difference between giving and lending.

The more they can lend to the club, the more interest they can earn.
Many of the losses are self inflicted. Loan interest on 37m @ 8.5% is more than £3m, multi-manager pay offs, C Club and VIP hospitality costs.

Cha-ching !!

Only the money used to pay of the ABC loan has interest on it.

[baz]

see above comment ref bbc site

Council rulings can be overuled, especially if a new sporting complex is 500m down the road.

[Gerryhatrick]

Only the money used to pay of the ABC loan has interest on it.

I assumed that if BE was bankrolling the club debt, then it was all the debt, so I'm happy to be corrected. The Sarita loan is the same amount £10m is this right? How is the balance covered?

I get the impression that BE will continue to bankroll up to the point were he becomes over-exposed against the stadium value, which must be about now if -£50m. Surely he's looking to sell at our peak, isn't he?

[LeeCookFan]

I assumed that if BE was bankrolling the club debt, then it was all the debt, so I'm happy to be corrected. The Sarita loan is the same amount £10m is this right? How is the balance covered?

I get the impression that BE will continue to bankroll up to the point were he becomes over-exposed against the stadium value, which must be about now if -£50m. Surely he's looking to sell at our peak, isn't he?

The rest of the money is still payable back to Bernie, Flavio and Mittal with no interest.

The scenario you point out is not viable to a business man. If the board bankrolled it (loaned interest free money - which is what I assume you are getting to) and gets it too over exposed, the club value would fall while the amount of money are investors put in will increase. This would lead to it being very difficult for the owners to sell up at their asking price making it close to impossible for them to gain a profit.


or

In simple terms: All their profit will come from the sale. There are strict laws preventing them from ripping us off (hence the rate of the loan is slightly better than ABC). They will sell now or get us established in the PL then sell.

[Scarlet pimple]

Council rulings can be overuled, especially if a new sporting complex is 500m down the road.

That was put in place to protect qpr.