QPR for sale?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
TheLoneRanger said:
In normal business it doesn't, but this is football. In normal business you just wouldn't invest in something so risky, which is why football is a billionaires game and a status symbol.

But you invest in football and expect to make a profit. Tony and the other board members invested heavily for a newly promoted side thinking it would ensure survival, it back fired and the debts started to build at a rate of knots. But as he's always said, they invest with the full knowledge that it could go wrong, but it was they the owners who were paying for it and not the club. This just proves it wasn't BS. They will continue to do so until Old Oak has been decided, it's this which is the grand prize. When you stand to make Billions on that project, you'll happily spend millions on the figurehead of the proposal to start Old Oak. The club and it's loses, training facilities and new stadium will all come cheap to them if they get Old Oak.

It's if they don't win the bid, that's when I'll be worried. But until then we've got owners trying to move us forward, even if it is 3 steps backwards at the moment.
Click to expand...
Agree all these millions will be pennies to them if they get OOC bid which i believe they will.
 
The posters that have concluded that converting the debt into equity is a good thing (though not necessarily for the holder of the debt) are quite correct. At a stroke it can have a material impact on the net assets figure on the balance sheet, where debt is shown (largely) as a long-term liability, but equity as part of shareholder funds. Perhaps a bit of rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic, but it can straight away make the balance sheet (and therefore the club) more attractive to either an acquirer, who won't then have to deal with the debt, or a new investor, who won't now see his investment immediately swallowed up by the need to service the debt first.

It supports the old adage about how to become a millionaire. Apparently, all you need to do is start out a billionaire and then buy a football club.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Didley Squat
Below are questions that I have asked on Report. My apologies if they have been answered in this thread & I have missed them.

Please forgive my non grasp of this & feel free to answer my questions. I completely understand P&L's but balance sheets are just a jumble of figures to me!

1) Am I correct that the club has issued approx. £180 million value of shares & these have all been bought by the current board. Thus we would greatly reduce our debt & greatly increase share capital?

2) Will the greatly reduced debt improve the chances of the club being sold?

3) However, to purchase a majority share of the club, wouldn't any prospective purchaser have to buy a lot more shares?

4) If this is correct, wouldn't a buyer still have to spend more than the value of the club to gain control?

5) I can understand that this would help the club & the shareholders but how would future owners beneifit, unless they leave TF etc. with a large (but minority) numnber of shares?

Read more: http://qprreport.proboards.com/thread/42143/fernandes-sell-tweets?page=2#ixzz3r1Hox5gY
 
terryb said:
Below are questions that I have asked on Report. My apologies if they have been answered in this thread & I have missed them.

Please forgive my non grasp of this & feel free to answer my questions. I completely understand P&L's but balance sheets are just a jumble of figures to me!

1) Am I correct that the club has issued approx. £180 million value of shares & these have all been bought by the current board. Thus we would greatly reduce our debt & greatly increase share capital?

2) Will the greatly reduced debt improve the chances of the club being sold?

3) However, to purchase a majority share of the club, wouldn't any prospective purchaser have to buy a lot more shares?

4) If this is correct, wouldn't a buyer still have to spend more than the value of the club to gain control?

5) I can understand that this would help the club & the shareholders but how would future owners beneifit, unless they leave TF etc. with a large (but minority) numnber of shares?

Read more: http://qprreport.proboards.com/thread/42143/fernandes-sell-tweets?page=2#ixzz3r1Hox5gY
Click to expand...
3) no, the shares have no value, a prospective buyer would just negotiate a price for the club and the current owners would transfer the billions of shares to them, possibly for £1, if they want. It is, in fact, a very generous thing to do, there is no way they can get their money back. I'd be applauding if it wasn't their own stupid fault for getting in this position in the first place.

Are they still loaning money to the club to meet daily running costs, or is the parachute payment being used for this? The club could of course still go into administration if they turn the tap off on their loans/gifts (I wouldn't blame them) and we can't stay within our overdraft.
 
smoke and mirrors

A lot of money has been spent
Other people have it
The club does not

You can only buy things with money

It's a massive balls up and I agree that any new buyers would need to buy a debt with little chance of seeing any money for years

Smart money won't touch football

It will need another nut case

Thankfully there is a untapped supply of silly rich who want London
 
AussieQPR said:
On the contrary UTR's, the vultures wait till businesses like us start to fall, wait till we are drawing our final breath, then swoop in to buy at rock bottom price ...... Just like tango & cash. We just need to hope that whoever buys us, is somewhat football mad.

In saying that, surely one would expect the Mitals to simply take over the club as a whole. They have the money, it just comes down to whether they wish to amuse themselves with us a little longer.
Click to expand...
The Mittals are steel magnates, and we know the price of steel right now don't we. So they aren't as rich as they were.
 
qpr1954 said:
The Mittals are steel magnates, and we know the price of steel right now don't we. So they aren't as rich as they were.
Click to expand...
You are correct sir, they were worth 50 billion but by now, must be valued at a miserly 20 billion.
 
AussieQPR said:
You are correct sir, they were worth 50 billion but by now, must be valued at a miserly 20 billion.
Click to expand...
According to Forbes his wealth is down to US$10bn, about £7.5bn now. I don't think he'll ever go hungry, but for someone who was once the richest man in Europe he is now out of the top 100 in the world and his company made a loss last year. It's quite a spectacular fall. Perhaps one day he will regret spending $60m on his daughters wedding to Amit.

Also according to Forbes, Fernandes was down to US$530m earlier this year, a 20% fall in a year. I suspect a lot of Mittal's wealth is real, i.e. he can get his hands on it (though the value of some of his assets like steel mills is possibly negative at the moment) whilst Tone's is largely on paper. Presumably his divorce will be less financially punitive in Malaysia than it would over here or in the US.

These blokes have on plenty on their minds besides QPR. The share deal may be a way for them to draw a line under their investment, they stay as owners but say 'that's it' for interest free and unrepayable loans, and unless we balance the books we start to rack up real debt. If they really think we can be promoted with this squad and a new manager they won't play double or quits (they are really good at losing that game) in the January window, incomers will have to be financed by leavers, and come in on lower wages. Then they have to balance the return on investment from capital investments - training ground and stadium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Didley Squat
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back