Oh dear...could this be the end of QPR as we know it??

[Systemsguy]

I think we are getting the jargon reversed.

When I was a kid Man Utd were among the most famous football teams in the world because they were actually rather good. A forward line of Best, Charlton, Law, Kidd & Aston would destroy the majority of Champions league pretenders today.

Out of that base grew the brand. Everyone knew what Man U represented and everyone wanted the shirt.

These days smaller clubs,and I include us amongst them, seek to "establish a brand" without the basis of football success, which means actually being quite good.

Perhaps that's where the problem lies?

(ducks back in the bunker)

I sort of agree but disagree with this as the brand was more established during the 90's when fergie was in charge and kids only like winners....

Although I am of an age where I remember those three play for ManUre, the club was on the slide and slipped into the old 2nd division shortly afterwards, Utd had a glamour about them but not the following they have now..

There were far more Liverpool fans during the 70's due to their success at the time, how often do we hear Chelski fans on radio or forums say I've been a fan since 2003?

Uncle Tony and I assume his fellow shareholders want a "global brand" hence the football clinic last week in Malaysia.....

I have no problem with the concept but I want the execution to be more steady than the complete @rse up we witnessed during the two premiership years....,

[Parks Queen]

This journalist is very good by the way, so it's worth considering what he writes.

Heard him on the radio last night and he was backtracking furiously "worst-case scenario...would have to deduct parachute payments...infrastructure payments exempt...an example of the kind of thing that might happen etc".

Thank you!

So the worthy journo just wanted to revisit the FFP issue.
No problem with that here, as far as I'm concerned.
And it has seemed to me that it selectively favors the few,
perhaps contributing to cementt* the status quo, pushing out the little guys.
And that it is not the most fair thing, should that be the case.

As far as QPR is concerned, full steam ahead is the message I get.
From those who actually call the shots, as in the board members and owners.

But I am very sympathetic, actually, to the plight of little clubs lower down.
And intend to do my very best to help get money into at least the Championship League.

I really would like an entire U.S. channel devoted only to Championship & MLS footie, all day and night. As well as an entire U.S. channel for PL and UEFA games. Two channels out of thousands. Would seem a reasonable ask. I am finding your Championship games as interesting as your PL games. I bet there are other foreigners out there with similar sentiments, and this is probably because it is easier to identify with this level of play. The up and coming footie nations might even prefer it to the PL level because it may help them feel less crappy. Who knows.


* 11/25 edit
I had typed in the word "cement." and it shows up as "miscreant"
so I went into the Edit mode and the word "cementt." is still there!
Yet it shows up as "miscreant" ... strange. What gives?

[Nodge70]

This journalist is very good by the way, so it's worth considering what he writes.

Heard him on the radio last night and he was backtracking furiously "worst-case scenario...would have to deduct parachute payments...infrastructure payments exempt...an example of the kind of thing that might happen etc".

Disagree vehemently that he's a "good" journalist. Very much like Henry Winter and Danny Taylor, because they give off the aura of being intelligent and writing long articles where a thesaurus has been used, doesn't equate to being a good journalist. Manipulation of half truths, worse case scenarios, not checking irritating actual facts like "rules" and the extent and legal constitution of the owners investments and then line that up with a whole raft of "what ifs", isn't good journalism. It's excellent sensastionalism and probably good to sell papers but it isn't good journalism.

[DAVEf]

This journalist is very good by the way, so it's worth considering what he writes.

Heard him on the radio last night and he was backtracking furiously "worst-case scenario...would have to deduct parachute payments...infrastructure payments exempt...an example of the kind of thing that might happen etc".

Disagree vehemently that he's a "good" journalist. Very much like Henry Winter and Danny Taylor, because they give off the aura of being intelligent and writing long articles where a thesaurus has been used, doesn't equate to being a good journalist. Manipulation of half truths, worse case scenarios, not checking irritating actual facts like "rules" and the extent and legal constitution of the owners investments and then line that up with a whole raft of "what ifs", isn't good journalism. It's excellent sensastionalism and probably good to sell papers but it isn't good journalism.

Such retained journos have two responsibilities --- to help sell their employers' newspapers and to follow any agenda set by that employer. To not do so would cost them their jobs.

Given that's true, any ideas of a free or capable press are surely untrustworthy as are any ideas of journos being necessarily clever and independent thinkers when they have to consider keeping their jobs.

[johnnymb]

The trouble with any non-Financial journalists writing about finances is they don't have a scoobie... It's definitely straight into the recycling for that article.

Note that as usual several other media regurgitators (Yahoo and others) have also published virtually the same article with all the usual absence of any common sense or due diligence.

When the media have no credibility in the content of the articles they write, then what have they got left? Online is now more about headlines and traffic than it is content...

[sparkypark]

Heard him on the radio last night and he was backtracking furiously "worst-case scenario...would have to deduct parachute payments...infrastructure payments exempt...an example of the kind of thing that might happen etc".

Disagree vehemently that he's a "good" journalist. Very much like Henry Winter and Danny Taylor, because they give off the aura of being intelligent and writing long articles where a thesaurus has been used, doesn't equate to being a good journalist. Manipulation of half truths, worse case scenarios, not checking irritating actual facts like "rules" and the extent and legal constitution of the owners investments and then line that up with a whole raft of "what ifs", isn't good journalism. It's excellent sensastionalism and probably good to sell papers but it isn't good journalism.

Such retained journos have two responsibilities --- to help sell their employers' newspapers and to follow any agenda set by that employer. To not do so would cost them their jobs.

Given that's true, any ideas of a free or capable press are surely untrustworthy as are any ideas of journos being necessarily clever and independent thinkers when they have to consider keeping their jobs.

Yawnsville, Arizona. Complete arrogance. Many journalists are lazy, as are people in any trade, but many work hard to explain what is going on.

[DAVEf]

Disagree vehemently that he's a "good" journalist. Very much like Henry Winter and Danny Taylor, because they give off the aura of being intelligent and writing long articles where a thesaurus has been used, doesn't equate to being a good journalist. Manipulation of half truths, worse case scenarios, not checking irritating actual facts like "rules" and the extent and legal constitution of the owners investments and then line that up with a whole raft of "what ifs", isn't good journalism. It's excellent sensastionalism and probably good to sell papers but it isn't good journalism.

Such retained journos have two responsibilities --- to help sell their employers' newspapers and to follow any agenda set by that employer. To not do so would cost them their jobs.

Given that's true, any ideas of a free or capable press are surely untrustworthy as are any ideas of journos being necessarily clever and independent thinkers when they have to consider keeping their jobs.

Yawnsville, Arizona. Complete arrogance. Many journalists are lazy, as are people in any trade, but many work hard to explain what is going on.

Not retained newspaper ones. Except when any explanations of what is actually going on suit the newspaper owners or increase sales.

[deepseahoop]

Its a great idea though isn't it, if a club is in debt fine them and put them further into debt as that'll help wont it. I think they should deduct points now that would work! If we were fined Tony would just use the loss on QPR as a tax deductiion somewhere elsr.

[Esox Lucius]

I think it is because a points deduction would affect the big 6 teams whereas a fine will, as you say, be written off elsewhere in the business(es)

[UxbridgeR]

If we were fined Tony would just use the loss on QPR as a tax deductiion somewhere elsr.

Well that's a consolation

[Nodge70]

Such retained journos have two responsibilities --- to help sell their employers' newspapers and to follow any agenda set by that employer. To not do so would cost them their jobs.

Given that's true, any ideas of a free or capable press are surely untrustworthy as are any ideas of journos being necessarily clever and independent thinkers when they have to consider keeping their jobs.

Yawnsville, Arizona. Complete arrogance. Many journalists are lazy, as are people in any trade, but many work hard to explain what is going on.

Not retained newspaper ones. Except when any explanations of what is actually going on suit the newspaper owners or increase sales.

There are a few who do. David Conn, Martin Samuel (gets a bad rep but generally is clued in and sees through a great deal of ephemera) and yes, even our good pal Mick Dennis.

[Micky]

David Conn does seem to have a blind spot for his beloved Man City who are one of the worst offenders in terms of FFP.

[Jamie]

David Conn does seem to have a blind spot for his beloved Man City who are one of the worst offenders in terms of FFP.

No he doesn't.

He wrote a book about City's takeover and subsequent league victory called Richer Than God. There's very good passages in it about how football is now no longer the same and is essentially a business. It's very clear in it that he's fallen quite a lot out of love with the team that he supported and the sport in general.

I think we all know that feeling really, but many find it hard to give up.

PSG will be the barometers of FFP. They're claiming that the Qatar Tourism board is sponsoring them to the tune of €200 million a year.

This after City had something like £350 million for a 10 year deal with Etihad. The PSG deal makes that sponsorship seem a bargain.

So, yeah, basically Financial Fair Play is starting to appear a load of nonsense, but the article in the Mail about us is only really sensationalised in the headline - standard newspaper nonsense written by subs - the prediction for the loss from last season doesn't seem outlandish really. Remember, the loss from our first season was about £26 million and we then went and signed a load of nuts players on mad wages.

I'd imagine we're minimising those losses now but I would put a large sum of money on us still picking up substantial wages for the likes of Park, M'Bia, Taarabt, Remy, Granero - not to mention Cesar.

Basically - I expect us to entertain bids for perhaps Johnson and Dunne in January if anyone comes calling and they can stay fit for a bit and if we can get cash up front.

[Nodge70]

I think any outgoings will be offset by a couple of very expensive (wages) incomings in January, loans or otherwise inc one of Harry's usual favourites.

[deepseahoop]

surely QPR as a business just need to expand their intefests beyond football as they have with marketing and retail into something lucrative such as an airline or steel.