I have no source, no inside information and no certainty, but I personally suspect there is a battle in the boardroom for the ownership of the club ongoing. The lack of sponsor, kit and signings in conjunction with Bhatia's public resignation leaves me relatively confident that the silence from the club is because they are haggling over the price. Which leads me to the question, is £100m a fair price? Bernie and Flavio are getting a lot of stick for holding out for said price, and I'm in no way a fan of their ownership, I would prefer the Mittals, but let's just examine if this price is fair. They purchased the then Championship QPR for £19m (according to various newspaper reports) back in 2007. Since then they have invested a sizeable amount of money, the club runs at a loss of £20m a year. They also took on the debt of the ABC loan. According to my maths, if they sold at £100m, they would not be making any profit, even thought they would be selling a Premier League club with much more potential profit than the Championship QPR had which they purchased. On the flip side, investing £20m at loss each year does not make a company more valuable. If anything, the fact a company runs at such a loss should make it less valuable! Hard to call. I suppose what worries me most is that a man who was willing to spend £30m on his daughters wedding isn't willing to spend £100m on a Premier League football club! Don't get me wrong, I think Mittal would invest (based on little other than gut feeling, I admit), and I'm certain he would be a better owner than the current crop, but I just don't understand why the £100m price tag is being balked at.
It's not just the up-front price, it's also the debt. Add on around £35million of debt, and it's not such a deal. B&F appear to want 100M plus transfer of the debt, whilst Mittal wants the 100M to include the debt - so only 65M in cash.
Well thought outqueensparkrangers! But what you have think about, they do not care about the club in the same way as we, the fans do! It looks a better deal for them if the club goes down, comes up and down again. They ( club) receive approx £90,000,000-00p then smaller payments for going down, then back again, etc! Now you can see how much money is involved. The very clever men at the top are no fools as they know money makes money, that how they become so rich! Yes, we may not like them as people but they are here, they own the club and can do what they like with it! Remember they own the ground , club and the tea lady! I think the only way to see them go if we went down to the 3thd. Div; what ever it is called now!. they would be off very quickly. In fact , it would not be to bad as then we would find some real people to own and run the club. I remember when the club went up to the 1st.Div; and came right down again with 18 points, losing 90% of the games 1-0 & 2-1, this time I think we will be wiped out, different times now. OH, for the days of JG. and Alec Stock, real `Rangers Men`! Shown my age again, but history for tells the future! So maybe things will change for the best when we go down, they go and????????????? ! Off now for my daily glss of wine! bye all and have a great week-end.
Afternoon James, us old timers have seen it all before, we will be great again but may have to suffer the fall out between our current owners and any prospective buyer,£100m is alot of money and if the debt was included in the overall price then its a fair price to pay for a Premier league club but if they want £100m plus covering the debts then there taking the piss.
Sorry for the short answer but NO! The club is worth no-where near £100 million. More like half that.
So do u regard Rangers as a bigger club than Aston Villa..! I (a life long Fan) don't..! Randy Lerner paid £50million + debt 4 Villa, that had 12 internationals on it's books, and you believe £100million is a fair price?
Many questions on this thread; Who says we are losing £20m per year? Since when did you get given £90m every time you came up? Are we really suggesting we want to be in the lower leagues again? Now i dont like B&E but this thread seems ill thought!
How much was Villa's debt? Anyone know? Obviously we're not as big as them, but they might have had a lot more debt. I suppose being a London club must add some £.
Favattack, Sorry if you thought that my thread was ill thought but as I live over here in the Sun, Sea & sex land of Portugal I do not and do not want to read newspapers or watch the TV. news! That is one of the reasons I wanted to leave the land of insanity. So you see I am not really up to date on things as you are! But I have been lead to believe that every time a club comes up again they get that type of payment,I maybe wrong but Burnley do it and make a lot of money, why not us? And WBA are known as the yo-yo club, are they not? And finally, I did not say that being in the lower leagues agin was great, I said that would help to get rid of our great two rich leaders. And by the way it was great in the the lower DIV: great fun trying to get up to the next one and had no debts ,thank to JG! Think I am off for one more glass of wine to clear my head, starting to think I am back in England again.!!!
In terms of fun, I agree with James the One. The lower divisions were fun! My happiest QPR memories (showing my youth here!) are Paul Furlong's goal against Oldham and the Sheffield Wednesday away game. Going up from the Championship was not as fun only because I didn't know when to celebrate thanks to Faurlin-gate. (I suppose and the fact we were top all year, there was more expectancy than when we finished second, last day of the season thriller!) That said, I'm not keen to go down to those levels again! I don't think the thread is so badly thought out. If we were worth £20m as a Championship Club, our potential earnings have much more than doubled with promotion, and as such, our value will have shot up as well. Being in London must add value - the land the stadium is on will be hugely expensive itself! I guess the point the thread makes well is that whilst we can find a lot to criticise Flav and Bernie for, it is difficult to establish what a fair valuation is, hence the lack of agreement between parties so far maybe.
The boys are saying "if you want it give us £100m otherwise we're keeping it" they don't need to sell;it's not like they need the money. Mittal got up Bernie's nose by declaring to the press that he was going to buy them out on a given Monday; it's about more than money, as has been stated many times before.
Exactly Twins hence Bern will now sanction some signings as contrary to popular opion Bern is no fool and I think he trusts Warnock after his success last season. Neil has said 'look Young Bernard, the lads are back training and jogging about between cones, I need to get a few more players in' to which I think Bern said 'ok but keep costs to a minimum'. Hence the signing of Yootha Joyce's ex and Big Dan ****tu.
If mittal owns 33% he would of had to pay for it so if tango and cash paid 19 then for 33% would cost around 6 1/2 mill then also if they are paying 20mill a year debt surely mittal must be paying a 3rd of that to so if they are paying 20 mill then 7 mill needs to be paid by mittal so over the 4 years = 12 mill ( to but club) and 4 year of 13 mill makes 52 mill= 64 mill. So to say I don't think the club is worth a 100 mill about 65 would be a far price I hope you all followed.
I think you've hit the nail right on the head there..! The key to all this, is getting up Bernie's nose. Rupert Murdoch did the same, and the Midget wasn't movin 4 no1
following on from this, if bernie & flav want £100m for their shares and that's only 66% of the club, then they're actually valuing it at £150m!! ridiculous.
Fair price is completely irrelevant. The price is what someone will pay for it. Are the season tickets at a fair price? No, but many of you have bought them. Are the match day prices fair? No, but I will pay them when I can get up. Is the price for the club fair? No, but the Goons are winning so far on the pricing. Maybe they will win here too.
That is stupidly high I definitely wouldn't buy the club at that price I feel 65mill is probably about right that's all they invested.
As a general principle, both the Goons and the Mittals should know what the financial state of the club is by now, who paid what, what debts outstanding etc... Since they all sit on the board (or sat, anyway, before the Mittals came off the board) they should be able to reach common ground on the facts. It's not as though this is a new purchaser coming in, that has to instruct investigating accountants to prepare a pre-purchase report. So, if they agree the facts, the question left is, what profit should the Goons take out of the deal, having (1) initiated the QPR venture and (2) for the most part, financed the club since the date in (1). The Goons want to be richly rewarded for creating something the Mittals want to buy. The Mittals see the Goons as owning something that they won't run well, is expensive (most Premiership clubs run at a loss) and which they would prefer to sell now at the point of the club's highest investment value (unless there is substantially more investment). In the meantime, the club's prospects are being damaged by inactivity on the transfer market. Time is not on the Goons' side, my son...as Lakshmi will probably be saying to Amit...
