| Being a tenant of a ground 13:16 - Mar 4 with 2500 views | loftboy |
Having read about what’s happening up at the Ricoh then there’s no way would I be supportive of moving from Loftus Road to rent a new ground, surely we have to own it, it may start off swimmingly but who’s to say further down the line we end up homeless.
How can a ground that was built to mainly house a football team end up being owned by a rugby team and the original team not being allowed to play there. |  |
| |  |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:38 - Mar 4 with 2427 views | Northernr |
Without checking I would think very few of the clubs that have moved into new grounds own them outright. Maybe Arsenal? Southampton? I don't know.
Hull don't, it's officially owned by the council in return for the land it was built on - which could be a model we go down. Problems have arisen here because the council has an arm's length Stadium Management Company that runs the stadium, and basically whoever owns Hull City is also responsible for the SMC, so you get an absolute thundercnt like Allam in charge and suddely the stadium starts going to rack and ruin and any other tenants (Hull FC in this instance) start getting shafted.
The Coventry set up, as I wrote at the time and was shouted down by Coventry fans, was always doomed to failure. Your stadium needs to be an asset generating revenue, particularly in the FFP era. They signed a rental agreement that required an average attendance north of 20,000 just to break even. Moving out of a ground you own into one you don't and paying punitive rent to do it is only ever going to end up being a disaster.
We should tread carefully. Loftus Road may be hamstringing us FFP wise, but ownership of it is the only thing that's saved us several times in the last 20 years because we've been able to borrow money against it. Hull FC can't borrow money as easily as we can because they've nothing to mortgage it against. |  | | |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:51 - Mar 4 with 2379 views | thame_hoops |
I dont see why teams here dont share grounds like they do in some American sports, would make more sense financially especially for London teams |  | | |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:53 - Mar 4 with 2375 views | BrianMcCarthy |
Agree with Clive that we have to be extremely careful. I don't trust our owners on this at all. And I won't until I see us in the magical new ground and we're assured that it's owned by the club. I have very little faith it's going to end that way. |  |
| |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:54 - Mar 4 with 2370 views | loftboy |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:51 - Mar 4 by thame_hoops |
I dont see why teams here dont share grounds like they do in some American sports, would make more sense financially especially for London teams |
I wouldn't be adverse to that either, but it would have to be on a 50-50 basis. | |
| |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 14:44 - Mar 4 with 2295 views | DejR_vu |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:53 - Mar 4 by BrianMcCarthy |
Agree with Clive that we have to be extremely careful. I don't trust our owners on this at all. And I won't until I see us in the magical new ground and we're assured that it's owned by the club. I have very little faith it's going to end that way. |
Agree 100% that for our future stability we need to own our ground.
However, something that's either slipped under the radar, or that I've perhaps misunderstood, is that I believe the club doesn't even own Loftus Road anymore. I seem to recall that the ownership of the club and the stadium have been separated. I think the owners own both but, if i'm correct, they could, in theory, sell the club and retain the ground. You'd have to be mad to buy the club anyway, particularly without owning the ground, but it would be possible in that scenario. I seem to recall Ron Noades did it at Palace. |  |
| |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 14:47 - Mar 4 with 2281 views | CamberleyR |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:38 - Mar 4 by Northernr |
Without checking I would think very few of the clubs that have moved into new grounds own them outright. Maybe Arsenal? Southampton? I don't know.
Hull don't, it's officially owned by the council in return for the land it was built on - which could be a model we go down. Problems have arisen here because the council has an arm's length Stadium Management Company that runs the stadium, and basically whoever owns Hull City is also responsible for the SMC, so you get an absolute thundercnt like Allam in charge and suddely the stadium starts going to rack and ruin and any other tenants (Hull FC in this instance) start getting shafted.
The Coventry set up, as I wrote at the time and was shouted down by Coventry fans, was always doomed to failure. Your stadium needs to be an asset generating revenue, particularly in the FFP era. They signed a rental agreement that required an average attendance north of 20,000 just to break even. Moving out of a ground you own into one you don't and paying punitive rent to do it is only ever going to end up being a disaster.
We should tread carefully. Loftus Road may be hamstringing us FFP wise, but ownership of it is the only thing that's saved us several times in the last 20 years because we've been able to borrow money against it. Hull FC can't borrow money as easily as we can because they've nothing to mortgage it against. |
Haven't checked any lower than the Championship but of the new grounds built in the last 25 years Leicester, Stoke, Middlesbrough, Derby, Bolton, Wigan, Reading, Rotherham all own their freeholds as well as Arsenal and Southampton as you correctly surmised. |  |
| |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 15:13 - Mar 4 with 2233 views | CroydonCaptJack |
I don't think there is a issue if it is a very long leasehold and also that the terms of the lease are not restrictive. |  | | |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 12:23 - Mar 5 with 1926 views | YorkRanger |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:53 - Mar 4 by BrianMcCarthy |
Agree with Clive that we have to be extremely careful. I don't trust our owners on this at all. And I won't until I see us in the magical new ground and we're assured that it's owned by the club. I have very little faith it's going to end that way. |
I'm with Brian on this. Given LR is our principle asset I will take a lot of convincing before agreeing that any stadium move is being done for the good of the club..... |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Being a tenant of a ground on 12:34 - Mar 5 with 1909 views | 2Thomas2Bowles |
You've all been told we have to move out of LR, if that's not to LCS
then I can see a ground share and the owners selling LR.
QPR is busted anyway.
Stamping your feet at the prospect will just wear out your shoes nothing more. |  |
| |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 14:59 - Mar 5 with 1815 views | ridethewave |
It's a necessity that the club own the stadium. This can't be up for debate. If that means moving out the borough then I'm sorry to say that's what we'll have to do. |  | | |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 17:01 - Mar 5 with 1758 views | BostonR |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 12:34 - Mar 5 by 2Thomas2Bowles |
You've all been told we have to move out of LR, if that's not to LCS
then I can see a ground share and the owners selling LR.
QPR is busted anyway.
Stamping your feet at the prospect will just wear out your shoes nothing more. |
In what way are the club busted? |  | | |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 17:21 - Mar 5 with 1737 views | PunteR |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:53 - Mar 4 by BrianMcCarthy |
Agree with Clive that we have to be extremely careful. I don't trust our owners on this at all. And I won't until I see us in the magical new ground and we're assured that it's owned by the club. I have very little faith it's going to end that way. |
Same.
In the almost a decade that the owners have been here i've seen literally nothing to give me any confidence in them. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 17:23 - Mar 5 with 1736 views | qprd |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 13:38 - Mar 4 by Northernr |
Without checking I would think very few of the clubs that have moved into new grounds own them outright. Maybe Arsenal? Southampton? I don't know.
Hull don't, it's officially owned by the council in return for the land it was built on - which could be a model we go down. Problems have arisen here because the council has an arm's length Stadium Management Company that runs the stadium, and basically whoever owns Hull City is also responsible for the SMC, so you get an absolute thundercnt like Allam in charge and suddely the stadium starts going to rack and ruin and any other tenants (Hull FC in this instance) start getting shafted.
The Coventry set up, as I wrote at the time and was shouted down by Coventry fans, was always doomed to failure. Your stadium needs to be an asset generating revenue, particularly in the FFP era. They signed a rental agreement that required an average attendance north of 20,000 just to break even. Moving out of a ground you own into one you don't and paying punitive rent to do it is only ever going to end up being a disaster.
We should tread carefully. Loftus Road may be hamstringing us FFP wise, but ownership of it is the only thing that's saved us several times in the last 20 years because we've been able to borrow money against it. Hull FC can't borrow money as easily as we can because they've nothing to mortgage it against. |
Itd be good for the owners to own the stadium to make their (financial) investment in QPR somewhat worth their while
but I'm not that concerned for the club for a few reasons.
If QPR is going to rent a ground, its going to do so on a very long term which is going to be very difficult to terminate. 20, 30 year terms.
It would be economically disastrous for whoever owns a large stadium designed for football to terminate their lease with their biggest tenant. Its not like a new club is going to sprout up in London and the owner is going to rent to them...
finally, yes- we would not be able to secure a loan with a stadium we didnt own. however, there are a lot of other ways to secure loans. for instance, an owner could provide a personal guarantee. we could mortgage our training ground (assuming we eventually own ours). we could pledge cash in back accounts. or we dont provide any security at all and just pay a higher interest rate.
if anything, loftus road may hinder our ability to borrow externally. the way the club is set up in LR,we lose money every year. its hard to get a loan if you're a business that exclusively loses money (and in a stadium that makes it nearly impossible to break even). playing in a bigger stadium which allows us to generate more profits would make it easier to borrow from a bank (even without a mortgage). i dont think its that big of a deal. [Post edited 5 Mar 2019 17:25]
| | | |
| Being a tenant of a ground on 14:26 - Mar 7 with 1459 views | Nov77 |
Consultation on LC stadium starts next week, no specific mention of us.......
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
