| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan 16:43 - Mar 27 with 16636 views | whittocksRs |
This story just published on a Norwegian financial website. Along with the £15m stadium loan, we now owe banks £42m. This latest loan is secured against our parachute payments, which drop significantly at the end of this season. It's also secured against any potential TV money for the Premier League, which seeing as we're not in the Premier League, seems terrifying. Make of it what you will: http://www.fotballsonen.com/qpr-med-nytt-banklan/ [Post edited 27 Mar 2014 16:44]
|  | | |  |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 21:30 - Mar 27 with 2871 views | FredManRave |
It's surely just a coincidence that, within 24 hours of the anouncement that NSW is to be abolished due to advertisers threatening to pull out which would result in the end of this site due to it having no funding for its running costs, Fernandes goes and gets a 27million pound loan.
Is there nothing this guy won't do to please the fans... |  |
| |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 23:24 - Mar 27 with 2797 views | qpr1976 |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 19:39 - Mar 27 by QPR1882 |
We get £60m minimum over 4 years not £48m
Parachute payments to be increased for Premier League's relegated clubs
THE Premier League's relegated clubs are set to be given a helping hand due to a change in parachute payments.
Published: Tue, April 16, 2013
Tony Fernandes' QPR look set to benefit from the increase in parachute payments
Currently clubs that drop down to the Championship receive £48m over four years, however now they are set to receive in excess of £60m over a four-year period from next season.
As it stands, Reading, QPR and Wigan will be the beneficiaries of the new payment scheme.
[Post edited 27 Mar 2014 19:41]
|
My apologies, I thought that started Next season for relegated clubs This season.
1 year out - poor form | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 23:28 - Mar 27 with 2795 views | qpr1976 |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 20:44 - Mar 27 by daveB |
it's not about how rich the owners are it's qpr taking the loan out who are not rich |
Good point DaveB, I wish I'd put it that way. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 07:40 - Mar 28 with 2735 views | NathanNI |
"The loan is personally guaranteed in full by the club’s shareholders, who remain wholly committed to the club’s short, medium & long-term objectives»"
Not the club's objectives, their own. We are running at record losses, the club has been run badly for years, and it still is.
But hey, its ok, 'Uncle Tony' is staying around (condescending much?) Of course he's staying around, he's sitting on a potential goldmine with his plans for over the A40.
He (and the rest of them) have probably invested more than any of the previous regimes combined (or will one day) but they'll also change our club forever, and erode its charm, what we love and respect about the club.
For me, we are vulgar. I don't like us one bit. I love Rangers, but I don't like what we have become. |  | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:02 - Mar 28 with 2703 views | jeffro |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 17:59 - Mar 27 by nadera78 |
I'm sorry, but the idea that we need to "improve out credit rating" is so utterly ridiculous as to be unbelievable. Our owners have a combined wealth of tens of billions, no bank in the world would turn down a request for financing, especially for the Old Oak development which will make not just millions but billions of pounds in profits. Just have a think about the scale they are talking about - 25,000 residential units, commercial units, leisure facilities, a stadium and indoor arena. And all of that is being done in the name of the owners, not QPR.
I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but they sure as hell don't need to "improve our credit rating". |
The loan is taken out in the name of QPR Holdings" but backed with a personal guarentee from our wealthy backers.
It is quite conceivable that we need to build up the credit rating of QPR holdings especially with the ground if it is to be owned by the club.
The fact that they are personal guarentors to the loan simply adds confidence to me that their long term support is here, and infact us being a ltd company means that there is no risk against the club at all.
Not sure why it is so difficult for people to recognise the difference between a named loan acquirer and a personal guarator?, and why people automatically think it means someone worth billions would need to improve their credit rating. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:08 - Mar 28 with 2693 views | CroydonCaptJack |
TF was just about to come onto Talksport when I had to leave my car this morning. Did anyone hear it? |  | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:19 - Mar 28 with 2685 views | nadera78 |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:02 - Mar 28 by jeffro |
The loan is taken out in the name of QPR Holdings" but backed with a personal guarentee from our wealthy backers.
It is quite conceivable that we need to build up the credit rating of QPR holdings especially with the ground if it is to be owned by the club.
The fact that they are personal guarentors to the loan simply adds confidence to me that their long term support is here, and infact us being a ltd company means that there is no risk against the club at all.
Not sure why it is so difficult for people to recognise the difference between a named loan acquirer and a personal guarator?, and why people automatically think it means someone worth billions would need to improve their credit rating. |
The ground, along with the rest of the development, will not be built by QPR Holdings. It will be built by a separate company owned by Tune, Stadium Capital Holdings and possibly other investors. They will borrow the money to fund the development, along with selling units off plan to bring in early revenue. So quite why QPR Holdings needs to improve its credit rating is a mystery. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:30 - Mar 28 with 2673 views | jeffro |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:19 - Mar 28 by nadera78 |
The ground, along with the rest of the development, will not be built by QPR Holdings. It will be built by a separate company owned by Tune, Stadium Capital Holdings and possibly other investors. They will borrow the money to fund the development, along with selling units off plan to bring in early revenue. So quite why QPR Holdings needs to improve its credit rating is a mystery. |
You seem pretty much in the know. Has this been confirmed by our board, who will be building, owning or funding the investement?
In my eyes they are simply looking to build up the credit rating of QPR - whatever ltd company the name is in, and there is nothing wrng with that. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:47 - Mar 28 with 2653 views | 1BobbyHazell |
Why would QPR need an improved credit rating? We're already heading towards being a QUARTER OF A BILLION POUNDS in debt. How much more are we planning to borrow!!?? |  | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 09:51 - Mar 28 with 2645 views | daveB |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 07:40 - Mar 28 by NathanNI |
"The loan is personally guaranteed in full by the club’s shareholders, who remain wholly committed to the club’s short, medium & long-term objectives»"
Not the club's objectives, their own. We are running at record losses, the club has been run badly for years, and it still is.
But hey, its ok, 'Uncle Tony' is staying around (condescending much?) Of course he's staying around, he's sitting on a potential goldmine with his plans for over the A40.
He (and the rest of them) have probably invested more than any of the previous regimes combined (or will one day) but they'll also change our club forever, and erode its charm, what we love and respect about the club.
For me, we are vulgar. I don't like us one bit. I love Rangers, but I don't like what we have become. |
our charm went years ago when paladini and his elves turned us into a horrible club and the next two regimes just continued that |  | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 10:19 - Mar 28 with 2622 views | NathanNI |
Agreed, but those regimes got a lot of stick for it.
People call this fella Uncle FFS. And now he's adopting it.
I despair. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 11:23 - Mar 28 with 2594 views | Ingham |
Fascinating thread.
Difficult - and for many impossible, I suspect - to 'trust' people who tell you the Club is 'debt-free' (Bhatia), or that the debt is owed by the shareholders to the shareholders (Fernandes).
So trust them? Well, OK, trust them to do WHAT? QPR is a guaranteed source of revenue for THEM. Fernandes, doesn't propose to occupy the Old Oak circus himself, and he isn't proposing to pay for it himself.
As Beard has told us, QPR will be the Tenant. So QPR, like any Tenant, will pay off the Landlord's 'mortgage'. At the end of the loan period, when, presumably, the £200 million cost is paid, QPR will own absolutely nothing.
Not even Loftus Road.
My suggestion is that he should shift the debt to the new stadium, leaving QPR with a small but valuable asset. A ground it can fill. And, debt-free, and rent-free, one it can afford.
Hiring the new stadium as when advance ticket sales tell QPR that it requires an extra 25,000 seats - for the regular cup runs and, of course, that other thing that the Bhatia-Mittal axis promised (the Champions League where we're supposed to be right now) - the Club books it.
When advance season ticket sales - based on the sheer brilliance of our performances, the quality of the football, the unsurpassed tactical nous, the extraordinary consistency and excellence of the results - have risen to a suitable level - 40,000 is nowhere near Arsenal or the biggest Clubs, so it isn't as if I am asking too much - THEN the Club can take it for a season.
If we go down, and that is very unlikely with a genius like Fernandes losing the Club's money, we can move back to LR, and let all those table tennis competitions and safety pin manufacturers conferences pay for Old Oak the way they made the Olympic Stadium a full house every week.
If Fernandes is as useful as good, as clever, as honest, as long-term, as knowledgeable, as trustworthy as HE would like us to believe, the stadium will have an occupant which makes the project worthwhile for anyone WHO HAS STAYED WITH IT. For 20 years, say. Long enough to know, that we're a little Arsenal or United. If not quite as long as Gregory who, whatever his downside, did seem to have an almost unique talent in the clueless world of football club chairmen.
Go on then, how many actually believe Fernandes is telling the truth when he says he is here for LIFE? All right, no-one. Why, though? Do we only believe him when he is losing money, getting the Club relegated, squandering the value not just of ONE stadium, but of a second one?
Is it that when it might be something good, something successful for QPR, no-one takes him seriously. Interesting that we haven't seen Mittal funding a QPR Premiership League or Champions League successs.
Why? City and Chelsea had owners who ran up losses big enough to pay for that. But City and Chelsea not only had the two biggest grounds in the country, they had historically big crowds that filled them. So those Clubs had the money to lose.
QPR doesn't.
The most sinister thing is not the banks. Because the banks don't cluelessly squander the money the lender borrows from them. Even the mafia doesn't do that. But football club directors don't have the mafia's kind of moral sensibility. They have no compunction in borrowing the money AND losing it.
And walking away with tens of millions for themselves.
I'd also be wary about the claim that the £15 million debt is paid off. Ecclestone and Bhatia have played that game before. Paying off one lender, and taking out the same loan with another lender. The impression that the DEBT game before, pretending, along with his previous pals, E and B, that repaying the lender and taking out a new loan is the same thing as clearing the debt. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 12:16 - Mar 28 with 2569 views | QPR442 |
Scaremongering.
I say unless people have the money to buy QPR we should lets these guys get on with it.
Nothing we can do unless we buy it and that 'ain't gonna happen'. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 12:23 - Mar 28 with 2559 views | PinnerPaul |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 12:16 - Mar 28 by QPR442 |
Scaremongering.
I say unless people have the money to buy QPR we should lets these guys get on with it.
Nothing we can do unless we buy it and that 'ain't gonna happen'. |
Agree.
Hard to reconcile the panic over the huge debt with claims that Tune/Mittalls are going to walk away with "millions"
Director loans, however suspiciously you view them are a lot safer than the ABC type loan to a 3rd party.
We can't do anything about the £s, know even less so just got to get on with it. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 12:24 - Mar 28 with 2557 views | NathanNI |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 12:16 - Mar 28 by QPR442 |
Scaremongering.
I say unless people have the money to buy QPR we should lets these guys get on with it.
Nothing we can do unless we buy it and that 'ain't gonna happen'. |
I would call it concern. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 14:19 - Mar 28 with 2412 views | themodfather |
it may be a good faith move but trust banks?? lol
how many can get a mortgage or loan these days, with a £177m debt lol
i don't care how it's owed or if it's not claimed, it's counted as debt by deloittes so yep, worrying
to think of the demos' and rage against gp for far, far less.....when holloway had to pay for the players beans on toast as the club credit card was declined.....safe waters.... | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 15:14 - Mar 28 with 2386 views | PinnerPaul |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 14:19 - Mar 28 by themodfather |
it may be a good faith move but trust banks?? lol
how many can get a mortgage or loan these days, with a £177m debt lol
i don't care how it's owed or if it's not claimed, it's counted as debt by deloittes so yep, worrying
to think of the demos' and rage against gp for far, far less.....when holloway had to pay for the players beans on toast as the club credit card was declined.....safe waters.... |
You may not care how its owed but its vital.
£1M owed to the taxman or VAT people will get you closed down, £170M owed by the club to the shareholders won't.
They can't get money back from themselves!
Also the owners could write off the debt at anytime, you can't do that with a debt owed to a 3rd party - BIG BIG difference. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 15:39 - Mar 28 with 2376 views | Trom |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 17:59 - Mar 27 by nadera78 |
I'm sorry, but the idea that we need to "improve out credit rating" is so utterly ridiculous as to be unbelievable. Our owners have a combined wealth of tens of billions, no bank in the world would turn down a request for financing, especially for the Old Oak development which will make not just millions but billions of pounds in profits. Just have a think about the scale they are talking about - 25,000 residential units, commercial units, leisure facilities, a stadium and indoor arena. And all of that is being done in the name of the owners, not QPR.
I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but they sure as hell don't need to "improve our credit rating". |
It will be the company's credit rating not the owners.
Credit ratings are based on credit you have and payment history so you get a poor rating if you've never had any debt.
Debt issuers don't benefit from up side potential so the fact that the project could make £m of profit is slightly irrelevant to them. Debt holders have limited upside (interest payments) but plenty of downside (default). Credit rating is therefore important. Personal security offered by the owners of course will be important. |  | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 16:14 - Mar 28 with 2356 views | nadera78 |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 15:39 - Mar 28 by Trom |
It will be the company's credit rating not the owners.
Credit ratings are based on credit you have and payment history so you get a poor rating if you've never had any debt.
Debt issuers don't benefit from up side potential so the fact that the project could make £m of profit is slightly irrelevant to them. Debt holders have limited upside (interest payments) but plenty of downside (default). Credit rating is therefore important. Personal security offered by the owners of course will be important. |
I'll say it again, it won't be QPR borrowing the money to build the new stadium, it will be Tune, Stadium Capital, etc | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 17:08 - Mar 28 with 2328 views | stansleftfoot |
http://www.stadiumcapitalholdings.co.uk/
SCH are contracted to manage and facilitate developments. They will be instructed to become consultants and agents. They will find partners and investors, they may only look after certain parts of Old Oak Common. Its a twenty year project, QPR need to buy up land, businesses, property on the planned site for the stadium. That activity cannot be funded by QPR FC ltd.
The Loan is to fund QPR's losses which are standing at £23 million last year, and presumably not far short this year.
QPR don't have enough assets to secure a loan of £27 Million, same as a bank overdraft, the bank will always take a personal guarantee in any loan, from Football Clubs which are effectively commercial basket cases, they would like Amit, Tony and Rubens balls as well I should think.
QPR's credit rating is that of a commercial basket case, it is an unsustainable business and without these loans it is not " Liquid "
The money is to pay the current bills and to give it some cash in the bank.
It's quite clearly bankrupt as a business trading as a Football Club. It will not build a 30-40K stadium, it will become a tenant of a multi-purpose entertainment venue....go easy on my use of entertainment..... | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 13:09 - Mar 30 with 2232 views | Ingham |
Yes, I think that would be true if QPR was a business, but it isn't, as your post makes obvious. It is a commodity.
And, as such, it is an asset to the person who owns it. Its value depends on what it is, not on the relatively quality of what is going on at that particular address. And certainly not on the estate agent's or landlord's hype.
A particular terraced house is not worth lending more money against as a property because Mr and Mrs Smith have a wonderful home life, and QPR is not worth lending more money against if it has a wonderful football life.
QPR can do whatever it does with great ingenuity and skill. But it was no more a bigger Club after 23 years of Jim Gregory than it is now after years of failure but vast expenditure. Under Gregory, it could be argued that it did what it did with great skill, but much bigger Clubs could do more and better WITHOUT comparable skill and ingenuity.
The wealthy own terraced houses. They don't identify with them as their homes and don't live in them. They don't mind the terraced houses carrying debt, because they can recover the cost when they sell them. But they can't sell them at a higher price just because the people in them are happy, still less if they are successful.
To get their hands on their tenants increasing wealth, they need to get them out of the little house, and into a bigger one that COSTS more.
This will make the tenants poorer, but it won't make them any more successful. The big house is the PRODUCT of wealth for its occupant, not the basis for it.
A successful Club doesn't put any money in the owner's pocket. The money is the Club's, but the landlord can put up the rent, or levy this or that charge or fee, but only to the point that the tenants have no alternative but to pay.
That is why they want to move QPR from a Ground that was long ago bought and paid for, and for which it doesn't have to pay rent, to one which it WILL have to pay for, and where money from events and other activities will NOT go to the Club.
That won't improve the football at all, but as various posts have pointed out, they don't care about that, among other things, because they have no more idea to do it than they know how to improve other people's home lives.
Then issue of quality football won't matter. If the price goes up, they can trade the Club at a profit. If it doesn't, they can put up the rent. And if that isn't lucrative enough, they will call in the debt, close the Club down, as most of our chairmen in the last 60 years have proposed, and sell the Ground for redevelopment. Every chairman but one in the 40 years from the mid sixties to the mid-naughties was involved in schemes to close the Club down and sell off either LR or one or more of the other West London grounds.
A basket case doesn't become less of a basket case because it is dumped in a bigger basket. | | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 13:35 - Mar 30 with 2215 views | TheBlob |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 13:09 - Mar 30 by Ingham |
Yes, I think that would be true if QPR was a business, but it isn't, as your post makes obvious. It is a commodity.
And, as such, it is an asset to the person who owns it. Its value depends on what it is, not on the relatively quality of what is going on at that particular address. And certainly not on the estate agent's or landlord's hype.
A particular terraced house is not worth lending more money against as a property because Mr and Mrs Smith have a wonderful home life, and QPR is not worth lending more money against if it has a wonderful football life.
QPR can do whatever it does with great ingenuity and skill. But it was no more a bigger Club after 23 years of Jim Gregory than it is now after years of failure but vast expenditure. Under Gregory, it could be argued that it did what it did with great skill, but much bigger Clubs could do more and better WITHOUT comparable skill and ingenuity.
The wealthy own terraced houses. They don't identify with them as their homes and don't live in them. They don't mind the terraced houses carrying debt, because they can recover the cost when they sell them. But they can't sell them at a higher price just because the people in them are happy, still less if they are successful.
To get their hands on their tenants increasing wealth, they need to get them out of the little house, and into a bigger one that COSTS more.
This will make the tenants poorer, but it won't make them any more successful. The big house is the PRODUCT of wealth for its occupant, not the basis for it.
A successful Club doesn't put any money in the owner's pocket. The money is the Club's, but the landlord can put up the rent, or levy this or that charge or fee, but only to the point that the tenants have no alternative but to pay.
That is why they want to move QPR from a Ground that was long ago bought and paid for, and for which it doesn't have to pay rent, to one which it WILL have to pay for, and where money from events and other activities will NOT go to the Club.
That won't improve the football at all, but as various posts have pointed out, they don't care about that, among other things, because they have no more idea to do it than they know how to improve other people's home lives.
Then issue of quality football won't matter. If the price goes up, they can trade the Club at a profit. If it doesn't, they can put up the rent. And if that isn't lucrative enough, they will call in the debt, close the Club down, as most of our chairmen in the last 60 years have proposed, and sell the Ground for redevelopment. Every chairman but one in the 40 years from the mid sixties to the mid-naughties was involved in schemes to close the Club down and sell off either LR or one or more of the other West London grounds.
A basket case doesn't become less of a basket case because it is dumped in a bigger basket. |
So how does the Bedroom Tax affect this scenario? |  |
| |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan (n/t) on 18:44 - Mar 30 with 2137 views | Loft1979 |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 16:49 - Mar 27 by Gloucs_R |
+1 |
|  | | |
| Fernandes takes out new £27m loan on 21:15 - Mar 30 with 2092 views | Ingham |
Yes, that seems to be the problem. Fernandes seems to be under the impression that the debt is owed to shareholders by shareholders, which is meaningless. If that was the the case, the debt would be in the borrower shareholders' accounts, not the Club's.
TF's expression that 'all the debt' is 'stadium related' - he does relate it to a lot of different things, including the parachute payments - seems a little strange, too.
Can't mean 'secured against'. Loftus Road isn't security enough for his vast losses. But surely it can't be secured against the new stadium, which doesn't exist.
So 'related' doesn't mean 'secured'. For one thing, the debt is QPR's - as you say. But the stadium won't be - as Beard says.
Fernandes was interested in a similar deal at West Ham. There, the losses the West Ham investors ran up on the Hammer's account provided them with the pretext to sell off Upton Park (and pocket the cash).
While the people responsible for spending the vastly inflated £13 billion of taxpayers' money on the useless Olympic Stadium - such an asset that it requires an unsuccessful, modest-sized football club to pay for it.
At a further cost of hundreds of millions to the taxpayer. But not to the people responsible for vastly inflating the £13 billion, or losing the money at West Ham.
Since Bhatia and Mittal arrived, their regimes have lost in three seasons sums of the order of six times the losses incurred over the previous quarter of a century.
I wonder if that is what 'stadium related' means. If there are no losses, and the Club is successful and profitable, there is no role for people like Mittal and Fernandes at all.
But the Club's failure, while they remain rich and untouched by it all, like every one of QPR's major 'investors' over the past 25 years, enables them to use the Club to benefit themselves, without any corresponding benefit to the Club.
As Beard points out, QPR won't own the Ground or the new development (so it won't earn anything from either, as it would from Loftus Road, for example). That money will all go to the owner or the landlord of the development and the Ground.
But QPR will have to pay for it. THAT, I suspect, is why the debt is 'stadium related'. I don't know if the taxpayer will pay for Old Oak, but if the costs are going to be inflated to benefit all the pigs with their trotters in the trough, like the Olympic beanfeast, SOMEONE will have to pay for the Ground.
And that will be QPR. That is what a Tenant is for, and, Beard insists, QPR will only be a Tenant.
The Tenant pays the owner's mortgage. So the owner gets a valuable asset for nothing, at the Tenant's expense.
The real problem is that the lender or the landlord doesn't make up the tenant's mind. In QPR's case, the Club can't protect itself against the people who are loading the Club with vast debts for purposes which are anything but clear (and certainly don't reflect any kind of football intelligence or competence).
Even the banks don't lend money to borrowers, then insist on spending it themselves, for their purposes.
And spending it incompetently. And recklessly.
Great thread. Great thread, and great posts. One of the most perceptive discussions on this subject that I've ever come across. [Post edited 30 Mar 2014 21:27]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
