| QPR Accounts... on 22:20 - Mar 6 with 2995 views | QPR1882 |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:12 - Mar 6 by WeaverQPR |
can someone c&p the dave mc article as im at work and the link is getting blocked on this comp |
Huge losses is old news — what happens next is important
The publishing of QPR’s accounts, which show an annual loss of £65.4m, taking the net debt to just over £177m, tells its own story about the state of the club under its Malaysian owners, fronted by Tony Fernandes.
Fernandes, belatedly, has his fair share of detractors, and they’ll have their pound of flesh today, mostly with the benefit of hindsight, as was the case when it eventually became trendy to poke fun at the previously lauded Flavio Briatore.
Anyone unfortunate enough to follow me on Twitter, or worse know me personally, will know what my thoughts have been since the early days of Fernandes’ chairmanship. That debate is done and dusted. Things have moved on.
There has been plenty of speculation about the financial picture at Rangers and the owners’ motives.
Last April, I suggested this could be explained by the fact that even the huge losses being incurred would be dwarfed by the potential income from moving QPR to a Canary Wharf-style redevelopment, and the club subsequently revealed their plans for a move to Old Oak.
For me the real issue is now not the losses, which are and will continue to be huge.
The key question at this stage is I think this: Can those who have presided over such a debacle, who made Rangers a template for how not to run a Premier League club, be trusted with something as important as the sale of QPR’s home, and the creation of a new one while safeguarding Rangers’ long-term interests and integrity?
For some, probably the majority, the answer will be yes. And I suspect that further down the line anyone within the various fans groups who dares express any misgivings will be shouted down.
But all objective, rational evidence based on the last two and a half years suggests alarm bells should be ringing out there.
In fact, given what’s occurred before now, and the massive difference between Fernandes’ fluffy rhetoric and what has actually happened, I’m always surprised at the absolute certainty with which many talk about a new stadium and training ground — often as if they already exist.
The words ‘Warren Farm’ seem to have taken on almost mythical significance as the answer to all QPR’s problems. And I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen and heard Warren Farm and the planned new stadium offered as enough proof that Rangers are in good hands.
I saw a message on a Rangers forum a while ago, where what seemed like a very fair-minded poster said they’d feel better once the first brick is laid at Warren Farm or a new stadium. I think that’s a very balanced and well advised position to take.
Of course, any criticism of Fernandes provokes an angry reaction from some and this will probably be no different.
A common, and totally inaccurate, perception is that Fernandes put his money where his mouth is and was simply let down by the villain of the piece, Mark Hughes.
It just didn’t happen like that. Fernandes was the driver, not the nervous passenger, and the great irony is that the popular notion that he in some way had his ‘pants taken down’ — a term coined by Harry Redknapp — would actually be a better way of describing what’s occurred under the current manager than the previous one.
More recently, Fernandes has found himself between a rock and a hard place.
Having listened to Redknapp’s view that another relegation loomed (a view I absolutely shared and would stand by) unless the board piped down and let him steer the ship, what was Fernandes to do when the manager and short-term strategy he was tied to demanded yet more players be brought in? Stop backing him mid-season?
And so the nonsense, in the shape of Yossi Benayoun and others, has continued, and Rangers, as many fans have observed, don’t look that much different to the overpaid rabble that shamed the club last season.
The bottom line though is that Fernandes, as chairman, is responsible for this. I’ve always believed his unwavering popularity meant he’d have to get through a few managers and maybe one or two CEOs before this became the accepted view, though.
There is an alternative view to the one that says Fernandes has put his money in, backed the club to the hilt, and is basically a fantastic chairman the club are incredibly lucky to have.
It goes like this…
QPR were promoted to the Premier League — the culmination of a lot of factors and hard work that preceded the then owners and even the owners before them. This included fans collecting money in buckets to help the club.
Tony Fernandes inherited that promoted club. He wasn’t involved in the process of getting Rangers to that stage.
With promotion comes a massive financial reward — a huge influx of money clubs can still benefit from even if they go down.
In QPR’s case, that money has gone — and then some, because Rangers are actually worse off for their spell in the top division.
That money, that hard-earned potentially once-in-a-generation (at best) opportunity, was the club’s. It belonged to QPR. And it’s gone. It was wasted by someone with no previous involvement in the Rangers story. That’s the harsh reality.
I know that alternative version won’t go down well with some, especially those who simply blame Hughes.
It should also be acknowledged that although Fernandes inherited a promoted club, it wasn’t a strong one in terms of infrastructure, and many of the issues his board have faced would be a challenge for anyone.
And it could be argued that the pot of gold isn’t gone forever, because an immediate return to the Premier League is still possible.
But for Rangers, having spent so obscenely, to be banking on Charlie Austin’s return and a team largely of loan signings to save them from the financial implications of failing to get promoted, is inexcusable. Questions must surely be asked even if they end up scraping home.
Fernandes insisted he’d be “the first to go” — his own words — if his appointment of Hughes ended in failure. It did.
But he didn’t go, largely because the fans didn’t want him to.
Will that change in light of the new financial figures, or even if Rangers fail to go back up? Probably not.
That shows just how effective Fernandes’ interaction with fans on Twitter and in person has been, because that’s what’s sustaining him in terms of support — he certainly can’t rely on his record as chairman.
And while it’s easy to be cynical about this, the so-called ‘£20 fans’ dismissed by Briatore are entitled to cut what is a very decent man some serious slack when he is seen to treat them with respect.
That said, the most important way of respecting the fans isn’t by holding court on Twitter or in the pubs of Shepherd’s Bush, it’s by running their club properly and carefully.
If that principle is applied, Fernandes’ position arguably became untenable long ago. |  | |  |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:21 - Mar 6 with 2993 views | daveB |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:12 - Mar 6 by WeaverQPR |
can someone c&p the dave mc article as im at work and the link is getting blocked on this comp |
Huge losses is old news — what happens next is important
The publishing of QPR’s accounts, which show an annual loss of £65.4m, taking the net debt to just over £117m, tells its own story about the state of the club under its Malaysian owners, fronted by Tony Fernandes.
Fernandes, belatedly, has his fair share of detractors, and they’ll have their pound of flesh today, mostly with the benefit of hindsight, as was the case when it eventually became trendy to poke fun at the previously lauded Flavio Briatore.
Anyone unfortunate enough to follow me on Twitter, or worse know me personally, will know what my thoughts have been since the early days of Fernandes’ chairmanship. That debate is done and dusted. Things have moved on.
There has been plenty of speculation about the financial picture at Rangers and the owners’ motives.
Last April, I suggested this could be explained by the fact that even the huge losses being incurred would be dwarfed by the potential income from moving QPR to a Canary Wharf-style redevelopment, and the club subsequently revealed their plans for a move to Old Oak.
For me the real issue is now not the losses, which are and will continue to be huge.
The key question at this stage is I think this: Can those who have presided over such a debacle, who made Rangers a template for how not to run a Premier League club, be trusted with something as important as the sale of QPR’s home, and the creation of a new one while safeguarding Rangers’ long-term interests and integrity?
For some, probably the majority, the answer will be yes. And I suspect that further down the line anyone within the various fans groups who dares express any misgivings will be shouted down.
But all objective, rational evidence based on the last two and a half years suggests alarm bells should be ringing out there.
In fact, given what’s occurred before now, and the massive difference between Fernandes’ fluffy rhetoric and what has actually happened, I’m always surprised at the absolute certainty with which many talk about a new stadium and training ground — often as if they already exist.
The words ‘Warren Farm’ seem to have taken on almost mythical significance as the answer to all QPR’s problems. And I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen and heard Warren Farm and the planned new stadium offered as enough proof that Rangers are in good hands.
I saw a message on a Rangers forum a while ago, where what seemed like a very fair-minded poster said they’d feel better once the first brick is laid at Warren Farm or a new stadium. I think that’s a very balanced and well advised position to take.
Of course, any criticism of Fernandes provokes an angry reaction from some and this will probably be no different.
A common, and totally inaccurate, perception is that Fernandes put his money where his mouth is and was simply let down by the villain of the piece, Mark Hughes.
It just didn’t happen like that. Fernandes was the driver, not the nervous passenger, and the great irony is that the popular notion that he in some way had his ‘pants taken down’ — a term coined by Harry Redknapp — would actually be a better way of describing what’s occurred under the current manager than the previous one.
More recently, Fernandes has found himself between a rock and a hard place.
Having listened to Redknapp’s view that another relegation loomed (a view I absolutely shared and would stand by) unless the board piped down and let him steer the ship, what was Fernandes to do when the manager and short-term strategy he was tied to demanded yet more players be brought in? Stop backing him mid-season?
And so the nonsense, in the shape of Yossi Benayoun and others, has continued, and Rangers, as many fans have observed, don’t look that much different to the overpaid rabble that shamed the club last season.
The bottom line though is that Fernandes, as chairman, is responsible for this. I’ve always believed his unwavering popularity meant he’d have to get through a few managers and maybe one or two CEOs before this became the accepted view, though.
There is an alternative view to the one that says Fernandes has put his money in, backed the club to the hilt, and is basically a fantastic chairman the club are incredibly lucky to have.
It goes like this…
QPR were promoted to the Premier League — the culmination of a lot of factors and hard work that preceded the then owners and even the owners before them. This included fans collecting money in buckets to help the club.
Tony Fernandes inherited that promoted club. He wasn’t involved in the process of getting Rangers to that stage.
With promotion comes a massive financial reward — a huge influx of money clubs can still benefit from even if they go down.
In QPR’s case, that money has gone — and then some, because Rangers are actually worse off for their spell in the top division.
That money, that hard-earned potentially once-in-a-generation (at best) opportunity, was the club’s. It belonged to QPR. And it’s gone. It was wasted by someone with no previous involvement in the Rangers story. That’s the harsh reality.
I know that alternative version won’t go down well with some, especially those who simply blame Hughes.
It should also be acknowledged that although Fernandes inherited a promoted club, it wasn’t a strong one in terms of infrastructure, and many of the issues his board have faced would be a challenge for anyone.
And it could be argued that the pot of gold isn’t gone forever, because an immediate return to the Premier League is still possible.
But for Rangers, having spent so obscenely, to be banking on Charlie Austin’s return and a team largely of loan signings to save them from the financial implications of failing to get promoted, is inexcusable. Questions must surely be asked even if they end up scraping home.
Fernandes insisted he’d be “the first to go” — his own words — if his appointment of Hughes ended in failure. It did.
But he didn’t go, largely because the fans didn’t want him to.
Will that change in light of the new financial figures, or even if Rangers fail to go back up? Probably not.
That shows just how effective Fernandes’ interaction with fans on Twitter and in person has been, because that’s what’s sustaining him in terms of support — he certainly can’t rely on his record as chairman.
And while it’s easy to be cynical about this, the so-called ‘£20 fans’ dismissed by Briatore are entitled to cut what is a very decent man some serious slack when he is seen to treat them with respect.
That said, the most important way of respecting the fans isn’t by holding court on Twitter or in the pubs of Shepherd’s Bush, it’s by running their club properly and carefully.
If that principle is applied, Fernandes’ position arguably became untenable long ago. |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:29 - Mar 6 with 2977 views | WeaverQPR |
Will the tide start to turn against 'Uncle Tony' (cringe) especially if this season turns out to be another disaster by failing to get promoted? |  |
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:44 - Mar 6 with 2944 views | YorkRanger |
Curious nothing on the official website |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:46 - Mar 6 with 2939 views | Blue_Castello |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:29 - Mar 6 by WeaverQPR |
Will the tide start to turn against 'Uncle Tony' (cringe) especially if this season turns out to be another disaster by failing to get promoted? |
iF it does how the bloody hell is that going to help, as far as I read the situation all the debt is owed to the board in the same way as all of Chelsea's debit is owed to Abramovich.
If the current board pull the plug , then I can only see us back into Administration or completely folding, where the hell will we find millionaire / billionaire owners who want to buy a club with our debt.
Derbys post seemed a very balanced assessment, it's shit but the owners have known these figures for months and over the coming months we have to get our house in order. [Post edited 6 Mar 2014 22:50]
|  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:46 - Mar 6 with 2934 views | paulparker |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:29 - Mar 6 by WeaverQPR |
Will the tide start to turn against 'Uncle Tony' (cringe) especially if this season turns out to be another disaster by failing to get promoted? |
I think that depends on who departs in the summer
If it's still Arry & co i can see an uprising
Before today if you had a pop at saint Tony on this MB
You were shouted down as a looney Chelsea fan
TF has made cock up after cock up and patience
Is getting thinner than my hairline
BTW Dave B what is your thoughts on tone |  |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:48 - Mar 6 with 2931 views | onlyrinmoray |
Just did a bit of research as Im waiting for my Liverpool supporting son to start hurling insults Liverpool lost £ 50 mill Not sure if that is comforting but I know that all the big clubs lose millions each year Its just that " little ol QPR" have lost such an amount that its such a big deal |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 23:40 - Mar 6 with 2866 views | daveB |
just a bit on financial fair play, way i read it these losses don't apply to us until next season, all about what we lose this year which to be honest is still going to be big. Likely we'll have a transfer embargo but that doesn't come into effect until January which might do us a favour. Really you are better off not going up under these rules.
http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/financial-fair-play-explained.php
Note: The newly relegated clubs must comply with the FFP rules in full. During their first December in the Championship, a newly relegated club does not have to submit their accounts for the previous season (i.e. the accounts relating to the season when they were in the Premier League). However QPR, Reading and Wigan will need to submit their accounts for the 2013/14 season to the Football League (and will be hit with a sanction if their 2013/14 accounts show that losses exceeded the permitted thresholds). | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| QPR Accounts... on 23:57 - Mar 6 with 2838 views | daveB |
also worth pointing out Leicester will face a big fine when they go up, Forest as well if they make it, both have posted big losses as well, not in our league but big for this league | | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 00:10 - Mar 7 with 2825 views | ColombiR |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:20 - Mar 6 by QPR1882 |
Huge losses is old news — what happens next is important
The publishing of QPR’s accounts, which show an annual loss of £65.4m, taking the net debt to just over £177m, tells its own story about the state of the club under its Malaysian owners, fronted by Tony Fernandes.
Fernandes, belatedly, has his fair share of detractors, and they’ll have their pound of flesh today, mostly with the benefit of hindsight, as was the case when it eventually became trendy to poke fun at the previously lauded Flavio Briatore.
Anyone unfortunate enough to follow me on Twitter, or worse know me personally, will know what my thoughts have been since the early days of Fernandes’ chairmanship. That debate is done and dusted. Things have moved on.
There has been plenty of speculation about the financial picture at Rangers and the owners’ motives.
Last April, I suggested this could be explained by the fact that even the huge losses being incurred would be dwarfed by the potential income from moving QPR to a Canary Wharf-style redevelopment, and the club subsequently revealed their plans for a move to Old Oak.
For me the real issue is now not the losses, which are and will continue to be huge.
The key question at this stage is I think this: Can those who have presided over such a debacle, who made Rangers a template for how not to run a Premier League club, be trusted with something as important as the sale of QPR’s home, and the creation of a new one while safeguarding Rangers’ long-term interests and integrity?
For some, probably the majority, the answer will be yes. And I suspect that further down the line anyone within the various fans groups who dares express any misgivings will be shouted down.
But all objective, rational evidence based on the last two and a half years suggests alarm bells should be ringing out there.
In fact, given what’s occurred before now, and the massive difference between Fernandes’ fluffy rhetoric and what has actually happened, I’m always surprised at the absolute certainty with which many talk about a new stadium and training ground — often as if they already exist.
The words ‘Warren Farm’ seem to have taken on almost mythical significance as the answer to all QPR’s problems. And I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen and heard Warren Farm and the planned new stadium offered as enough proof that Rangers are in good hands.
I saw a message on a Rangers forum a while ago, where what seemed like a very fair-minded poster said they’d feel better once the first brick is laid at Warren Farm or a new stadium. I think that’s a very balanced and well advised position to take.
Of course, any criticism of Fernandes provokes an angry reaction from some and this will probably be no different.
A common, and totally inaccurate, perception is that Fernandes put his money where his mouth is and was simply let down by the villain of the piece, Mark Hughes.
It just didn’t happen like that. Fernandes was the driver, not the nervous passenger, and the great irony is that the popular notion that he in some way had his ‘pants taken down’ — a term coined by Harry Redknapp — would actually be a better way of describing what’s occurred under the current manager than the previous one.
More recently, Fernandes has found himself between a rock and a hard place.
Having listened to Redknapp’s view that another relegation loomed (a view I absolutely shared and would stand by) unless the board piped down and let him steer the ship, what was Fernandes to do when the manager and short-term strategy he was tied to demanded yet more players be brought in? Stop backing him mid-season?
And so the nonsense, in the shape of Yossi Benayoun and others, has continued, and Rangers, as many fans have observed, don’t look that much different to the overpaid rabble that shamed the club last season.
The bottom line though is that Fernandes, as chairman, is responsible for this. I’ve always believed his unwavering popularity meant he’d have to get through a few managers and maybe one or two CEOs before this became the accepted view, though.
There is an alternative view to the one that says Fernandes has put his money in, backed the club to the hilt, and is basically a fantastic chairman the club are incredibly lucky to have.
It goes like this…
QPR were promoted to the Premier League — the culmination of a lot of factors and hard work that preceded the then owners and even the owners before them. This included fans collecting money in buckets to help the club.
Tony Fernandes inherited that promoted club. He wasn’t involved in the process of getting Rangers to that stage.
With promotion comes a massive financial reward — a huge influx of money clubs can still benefit from even if they go down.
In QPR’s case, that money has gone — and then some, because Rangers are actually worse off for their spell in the top division.
That money, that hard-earned potentially once-in-a-generation (at best) opportunity, was the club’s. It belonged to QPR. And it’s gone. It was wasted by someone with no previous involvement in the Rangers story. That’s the harsh reality.
I know that alternative version won’t go down well with some, especially those who simply blame Hughes.
It should also be acknowledged that although Fernandes inherited a promoted club, it wasn’t a strong one in terms of infrastructure, and many of the issues his board have faced would be a challenge for anyone.
And it could be argued that the pot of gold isn’t gone forever, because an immediate return to the Premier League is still possible.
But for Rangers, having spent so obscenely, to be banking on Charlie Austin’s return and a team largely of loan signings to save them from the financial implications of failing to get promoted, is inexcusable. Questions must surely be asked even if they end up scraping home.
Fernandes insisted he’d be “the first to go” — his own words — if his appointment of Hughes ended in failure. It did.
But he didn’t go, largely because the fans didn’t want him to.
Will that change in light of the new financial figures, or even if Rangers fail to go back up? Probably not.
That shows just how effective Fernandes’ interaction with fans on Twitter and in person has been, because that’s what’s sustaining him in terms of support — he certainly can’t rely on his record as chairman.
And while it’s easy to be cynical about this, the so-called ‘£20 fans’ dismissed by Briatore are entitled to cut what is a very decent man some serious slack when he is seen to treat them with respect.
That said, the most important way of respecting the fans isn’t by holding court on Twitter or in the pubs of Shepherd’s Bush, it’s by running their club properly and carefully.
If that principle is applied, Fernandes’ position arguably became untenable long ago. |
Excellent stuff from Dave Mc - considered and not at all sensationalist so don't see what can be attention-seeking about it.
Particularly pertinent point about Fernandes' ability to retain the fans' support through his interaction on twitter, in the pub etc. I have no problem with this interaction, I applaud his openness, but it's all irrelevant given that he has run our club disgracefully badly.
Can't see what's particularly alarming about today's news in particular - you don't need to do many sums to work out that our wages are way beyond sustainable and have been since the first season in the Prem at the very least, but probably since the start of the Briatore era.
Personally I struggle to get too excited or upset about these numbers and care more about what the money is being spent on. At first I hated the fact we were living beyond our means but then I decided I could put up with being supported by the wealth of an owner as long as that money was being spent sensibly (as was case during our promotion year). If we spent the money properly that will probably lead to more success and a more enjoyable team to watch, therefore there's a smaller chance of debts being disastrous (even if that "sustainable" is not the QPR I've loved over the years - i.e. we can be attractive to big investors, somehow be a part of this horrendous Canary Wharf mark II).
As we're wasting it horrendously the danger is higher that it will end in disaster. Which will be painful but there are enough of us fans to ensure the club doesn't die, even if the entity we are today does actually go out of business (if Portsmouth somehow didn't then I don't think we could).
In any case we're beyond the point of being able to control it. If I thought about how poor a state the club is in all the time I'd never get any sleep. So I'll take the highs and lows of victories and defeats until we become something a little bit more likeable. | | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 00:22 - Mar 7 with 2811 views | AndyB |
And I still believe that someone with deep enough pockets (probably us or Leicester or both) will challenge FFP in the Euro courts and it will be found illegal.
It is restriction of free-trade |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 00:31 - Mar 7 with 2796 views | PunteR |
Very good article by Dave mc.
I'm really p***ed off with it all. Its embarrassing. With all the things that's happened to QPR in the past, Fernandes had a responsibility to look after our club. He hasn't.
What's frustrating for me is it didn't have to be like this. They just had to be patient and build the club properly. It should be all about the prep work . |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 01:05 - Mar 7 with 2785 views | Nov77 |
That's one of the best written pieces I've seen in a long time, david mc is right to ask these questions. |  |
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 01:12 - Mar 7 with 2769 views | FredManRave |
| QPR Accounts... on 00:31 - Mar 7 by PunteR |
Very good article by Dave mc.
I'm really p***ed off with it all. Its embarrassing. With all the things that's happened to QPR in the past, Fernandes had a responsibility to look after our club. He hasn't.
What's frustrating for me is it didn't have to be like this. They just had to be patient and build the club properly. It should be all about the prep work . |
Agree with the points made, especially the one about prep work or apparent lack thereof. As we are all well aware Fernandes is (was?!) a successfull businessman before he came to us, he's got an impressive business CV and is actually a qualified accountant. So you'd therefore have to assume that the takeover group did some sort of due dilligence before investing in the club and I remember Fernandes tweeting that he would speak to football club chairman for their opinion and advice but the way they've acted since day one wpuld suggest that neither of these actions were actually done, or certainly not to any great detail.
And people have mentioned, even on this thread how Fernandes has been unlucky with managers, specifically Hughes but then if the guy had set up a proper realistic business plan with wage structure etc at the outset and hadn't fawned over Hughes to the extent of leting him interview us and had actually had a back bone and been able to say no (Cesar!) to Hughes and hadn't himself got involved with certian deals (Park!) then maybe we wouldn't be in this situation.
As for the actual numbers, I have no idea of what they actually mean for the future of our club but I do know that yet again our club is being looked down upon, ridiculed and looked upon as how not to run a club. We're so far removed from the club we were just 3 years ago, the results on the pitch, the atmosphere in the ground and now the confirmed financial results from last year confirm what, imo, has been a disastrous "reign" so far by Fernandes. |  |
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 01:14 - Mar 7 with 2765 views | QPR1882 |
| QPR Accounts... on 00:22 - Mar 7 by AndyB |
And I still believe that someone with deep enough pockets (probably us or Leicester or both) will challenge FFP in the Euro courts and it will be found illegal.
It is restriction of free-trade |
So is the transfer windows.
What other business do you know is allowed to hire or fire twice a year only ? Can you imagine being a builder and know you cant take any big contracts on until after Christmas because you could not get any Brick layers in until Jan. | | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 08:50 - Mar 7 with 2650 views | 08olesen |
13 players out of contract and parachutes payments or premiership, will make them much better reading next year. Harry off the bill too |  |
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 09:02 - Mar 7 with 2626 views | BrianMcCarthy |
Superb article by Dave McIntyre. |  |
| |
| QPR Accounts... on 09:16 - Mar 7 with 2610 views | imustbemad |
The way I read it you are better off not going back up as you will be hit by a massive fine. If we are going to be hit with transfer embargo we have next window to prepare and I'm not sure if it affects the ability to use mid season loan market.
The FFP rules seem ludicrous for clubs coming back down especially for teams that are playing in the premier league for several years. This is why we seen so many managers sacked this season in the EPL. I believe this year is the most since the start of the EPL. |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 09:29 - Mar 7 with 2590 views | HantsR |
This in The Times today.
Queens Park Rangers have drawn up plans to drastically reduce their losses after announcing that their net debt had risen to £177 million, illustrating the scale of their lavish spending in the Barclays Premier League last season.
The West London club made a £65.7 million loss in a vain attempt to avoid relegation from the top flight last season, greater than the shortfalls suffered by Manchester City and Chelsea over the same period. Wages leapt to £78 million covering the year to May 31, 2013, eclipsing their turnover by more than a quarter, and was higher than that of Borussia Dortmund, last season’s Champions League finalists . The German club’s wage bill was £60  million.
QPR’s efforts to get their house in order will be helped by a number of highly-paid players leaving when their contracts expire in the summer and the club could recoup money from the sale of players such as Loïc Rémy and Adel Taarabt, who are on loan at Newcastle United and AC Milan respectively.
The sales may start to stem the losses but only promotion to the Premier League would help to eat into the debt. QPR are fourth in the Sky Bet Championship and fans who have fretted over their team’s chances of even making the play-offs this season are now perhaps more concerned about the club’s financial management and the possibility of a hefty punishment for failing to fall in line with Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules.
Tony Fernandes, the club’s owner, trumpeted prudence and common sense when he took charge of the club in August 2011, but the accounts reveal that he and his fellow owners had to invest in a further £73 million in loans, taking their total lending to about £160 million, in addition to a £15 million short-term bank loan taken out at the end of last season.
The Malaysian could become another owner who is a testament to failed ambition. “Football needs to change; there are clubs who are spending money that if they were in a real business they could not afford,” Fernandes said in 2011. “For the sake of football, proper business sense has to be made.”
The headline figures in the accounts are not pretty and neither is the detail. Television provided 70 per cent of the £60.6 million turnover and the parachute payments after relegation will make up only half of that shortfall this season. The playing and coaching staff grew from 84 to 107 and primarily accounted for the additional £20 million spent on wages. Júlio César – one of three goalkeepers whose weekly aggregate cost was about £150,000 – earned about £90,000 a week and the Brazil player has remained on the club’s books for half of this campaign. The next set of accounts, which cover this season, could also make for grim reading.
No wonder that QPR are among the clubs who have made a legal challenge to the Football League’s FFP rules. The rules require clubs to limit their losses this season to £8 million or face sanctions: either a transfer embargo or, if they have been promoted to the Premier League, a fine.
QPR must submit their finances for this season to the Football League in December, when the calculation will be made. The Football League says that it is confident that it will be able to claim any fines from sides achieving promotion, even though the clubs would no longer be under its jurisdiction.
“A critical driver of any club’s value is its presence in the Premier League,” Fernandes said in a statement . “The financial results reflect the club’s focus on trying to achieve on-pitch success.”
QPR do not expect the news to affect their plans for a new stadium, though, which is part of a much wider development in West London. “We are continuing to make progress in relation to both a new training ground and larger stadium,” Fernandes said. |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 09:31 - Mar 7 with 2583 views | daveB |
| QPR Accounts... on 22:46 - Mar 6 by paulparker |
I think that depends on who departs in the summer
If it's still Arry & co i can see an uprising
Before today if you had a pop at saint Tony on this MB
You were shouted down as a looney Chelsea fan
TF has made cock up after cock up and patience
Is getting thinner than my hairline
BTW Dave B what is your thoughts on tone |
I like Fernandes, I want him to do well and he talks a good game but every big decision he has made has been wrong so far and I have very little faith that he will get the next big ones right. It's been just as crap as under Flavio but with a smile and good intentions | | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 11:46 - Mar 7 with 2516 views | themodfather |
i opened the link with great fear....then read...presented with"great pleasure" and it's followed by a horror story, bram stoker couldn't dream up!!
off to find some strong alcohol! | | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 12:20 - Mar 7 with 2481 views | essextaxiboy |
| QPR Accounts... on 00:22 - Mar 7 by AndyB |
And I still believe that someone with deep enough pockets (probably us or Leicester or both) will challenge FFP in the Euro courts and it will be found illegal.
It is restriction of free-trade |
I agree , The European clubs are working hard to find ways around it .
It will all collapse as unworkable and illegal IMO |  | | |
| QPR Accounts... on 08:43 - Nov 4 with 1311 views | PlanetHonneywood |
Not sure if the bond scheme is still open, but could you have a quick butchers to see if we get promoted in the next few years? |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
