|
We
were delighted when David Davies agreed to an interview
with QPRnet.com before the recent LDV game against
Kidderminster. David talks openly about the clubs
finances, potential investment, the recent FA fine and
the criticism he receives.
QPRnet.com:
It was reported from the LSA meeting that the club did
not have enough money to complete the season. Is that
accurate?
DD:
As we stand today yes, but every club in the country is
in the same position. I think there is a degree of
people not understanding the economics of the game.
We’ve always said from the last set of audited accounts
that were published in May this year that we need to
bring in further investment and that situation hasn’t
changed.
We’re looking at ways to improve our incomings and we’re
about to launch our own lottery to help narrow the gap.
People have got to understand that for the last thirty
odd years this club was run at a loss. It’s been funded
either by a rich person putting money in – like Chris
Wright – or we transferred players out.
QPR is what it is, in that we need to sell a Les
Ferdinand every so often to make sure the books balance.
The difficulty for the us and the game as a whole is the
transfer market has died and those big figures are no
longer there.
QPRnet.com:
Obviously a statement like “we don’t have enough money
to finish the season” is quite alarming
DD:
It is, but I’m not responsible for presenting any
information in such a panic stricken fashion. I never
want to mislead people and I’ve tried not to since I’ve
been here over the last three years. So we do not have a
large wad of money that is going to dwindle over the
course of a season, and then we start again, we trade
like any other business and if factors change we have to
change the cash flow accordingly. If we have a loss in
form over the next few months it could have a very bad
effect on us, but we didn’t budget to go very far in the
cups so Man City is a real help for us. Brentford
cancelling saw us lose thirty thousand pounds in TV
fee’s but then we didn’t budget for them being there in
the first place. So whilst it’s galling to lose that
much money there’s no loss in the accounts as such.
QPRnet.com:
What is the latest on Wasps return to Loftus Road?
DD:
We’re pretty clear about it. Fulham are working towards
moving back to Craven Cottage. They’ve put in a planning
application but they haven’t got it yet. If that’s the
case we have no other options, Wasps have a contract
with us we would expect them to come back and honour it.
So to that extent if they want to stay away there’s a
negotiation process we’d have to go through. In the same
way that they’d want money off us for someone else
staying here, if they don’t come back I’ll be asking the
same questions.
QPRnet.com:
If Wasps come back and pay the same amount as before,
how can we afford to pay the loan back?
DD:
We’re working hard with ABC to restructure the loan,
I’ve not made any bones about that and I hope that when
we get to the position where Wasps come back that will
be taken care of.
QPRnet.com:
How much difference would first division football make
to QPR financially?
DD:
The central funding is an extra three hundred thousand
pounds a season but the big issue for us is the gate
money. Aside from the obvious increase in home
attendances we would probably aggregate out about eight
hundred away fans extra every game. Then you can
obviously charge more for sponsorships, boxes, match day
tickets etc.
All in all it’s probably worth close to a million pounds
a season. You go into the cups at a later stage, which
is better but it’s more about what you can do
commercially.
At the same time we’re now seeing player budgets drop in
division one and by the time we need to consider that
possibility I wouldn’t expect to see our squad size
differ much from today.
QPRnet.com:
Do we budget to be a second division club next season?
DD:
Yes, it’s the only way you can do it. I don’t believe
we’re relegation candidates so we shouldn’t budget for
that but neither should we budget for promotion because
all you need is a bad injury crisis and suddenly your
plans are in disarray.
On the other hand you don’t want to be to depressive
about it because the only way of balancing your budget
then is to look at the big figures which are players
costs. You have to strike a balance between having a
competitive team on the field, because if you’re not
competitive then you don’t progress and people don’t
turn up for the games, so we budget for relative
success.
This year we think we’ll be in and around the play
off’s, we haven’t budgeted for play off money though, we
only budgeted for the second round of the Carling Cup
and we’re going to go out in the first round of the FA
cup according to our budget. It’s difficult because
people will say we’re not showing any ambition, now I
understand that dichotomy but it’s a case of planning
for success and budgeting for failure.
Finishing second is the rump end of the stick really. If
you go up as champions there’s a prize fund and you get
the day with the trophy and feel great about yourselves.
If you go to the play offs, providing your nerves can
stand it and you go up it’s a great way to do it and
there’s a big cheque at the end of it.
QPRnet.com:
What is the latest on David Thorne’s investment? Why has
it dragged on so long?
DD:
David is flying over next week and it’s not like he’s
coming from Manchester so he wouldn’t be coming if he
wasn’t coming to do something.
QPRnet.com:
Are there any other interested parties?
DD:
What I can say is there has been more interest in us
over the last month than in the previous three or four.
Probably because we’re at a point in the season where
people are thinking we represent good value. There are a
number of teams you can invest in out there and we
represent the best value for money at the moment.
There’s club like Leeds that are trying to get
investment in, but look at what you inherit. The
infrastructure is so far dilapidated that you’ve got to
start investing more just to build it up. So for us,
with a team that’s challenging and a fan base that’s on
the rise so I think we are seen as good value.
QPRnet.com:
What did you think of Peter Risdale’s recent comments
about his failed bid?
DD:
They were in the Standard and I was personally very
angry about them. Peter came to us, I thought very
openly, I presented to him the full financial picture he
and had a very adult conversation about what he wanted
to do with the club and I was perfectly happy with that.
He wanted to appoint his own Chief Executive and I
thought that was fine. Yes I wanted to be treated with
the kind of human resource techniques that any plc would
offer but I wouldn’t have stood in his way.
I confronted Peter when he came down a few days after
the article because by then I now had thirty emails
telling me what a prize pratt I was. To his credit he
actually had to back track and say that he wasn’t
referring to me individually. Indeed he says later on in
the same article what a good job he thought we were
doing running the club. The reality of it is though it’s
the headline that catches the attention and it’s easy to
miss the validation later in the article.
It takes a certain amount of humble pie to stand up and
say “I understand what you want to do and I understand I
wont be a part of it but here’s what I’ve learned in the
last three years”. To have done that and then seen the
piece in the Standard hurt. I thought the least I could
do was confront him with it.
QPRnet.com:
Olly’s contract expires this summer; there has been no
talk of extending it?
DD:
I can’t really comment about that because I haven’t
discussed it with Ian and I don’t want to carry out
negotiations through the internet or the press. Suffice
to say I’m sure there will be a discussion, it will
start pretty rapidly and I’m sure it will be as robust
as it was last time!
There is a part of me that wants to keep Ian focused on
the job in hand and that’s keeping us in the automatic
promotion bracket and I don’t want anything to deflect
us from it.
QPRnet.com:
Is there a budget for further permanent signings
DD:
No. If we generate further money through investment or
going another couple of rounds in a cup competition then
who knows. We always had a budget set aside for loan
signings which we’re actually not using as fast as we
thought. I’m not saying for one second that we wouldn’t
bring in further players through that method but I don’t
want to use that up now.
QPRnet.com:
The supply of shirts has been nothing short of
disgraceful is this solely the manufacturers fault?
DD:
We’ve been very disappointed with it. Le Coq Sportiff
have been let down by their supplier in Romania and
consequently the home shirt was supplied very slowly.
They’ve changed supplier for the away shirt and now
we’re left with the ludicrous situation in the club shop
of having more away shirts in stock than we have home
shirts. I’m not going to duck out of the issue, we’ve
been let down. They’re embarrassed about it and so are
we and we’re working together to try to overcome it.
I do admit that part of the problem was that we signed
the Binatone deal in June, whereas the previous year we
knew that JD Sports were in position from the February
so we were able to sign the design off and it was all in
stock for pre-season. That’s where we want to be again
this coming year. To that extent we’re already in
negotiations with Binatone to extend the current deal
for a further two years. If we can get that done by
Christmas we can then bring the whole design process
forward this time.
As for this years shirt we are expecting another three
to four hundred home kits in stock by the time of the
Peterborough game.
QPRnet.com:
At various times we have heard of the so-called “era of
openness”, do you think you are as open as you can be or
is there room for improvement?
DD:
There’s always room for improvement but I think the
difficulty for some people is it’s never going to be as
open as they want it to be. For example we’ve been
criticised for not giving information on Chris’ deal at
Twyford but I’m restricted by confidentiality. All I can
say is if he’s happy for me to release it, I’ll release
it. I understand people being upset about it but there’s
nothing I can do. In business, when you get to the point
when you are doing land deals, they are generally
covered by confidentiality.
People got upset about ABC and the loan deal. Some
people thought Chris was going to write all his loans
off and we’d have had no debt at all. It was never going
to happen.
I think there is a degree of naivety about how open you
can possibly be. Compared to other London clubs I think
we’re pretty good. We meet with fan groups regularly, I
understand there is a meeting with QPR 1st
outstanding but we met with the LSA every other month
and we have an official supporters club now and we met
with them every other month, last year we did Q&A
sessions, we had the EGM. I’m just not quite sure how
people could say we’re not being open.
I’ve read the suggestion that the shares Chris gave back
to the club should be owned by a group of senior fans
but I’m really not sure that whoever made the suggestion
understood the arrangement in the first place. The
arrangement always was that those shares would vote with
the board so even the fans took possession of them when
they disagreed with the board, they’d have to vote with
them.
I have to accept there’s going to be that criticism as
part and parcel of the job and not get too upset about
it. You can’t please all the people all the time.
QPRnet.com:
You look round other 2nd Division clubs and
they are very fan run, the stewards are fans, the ticket
office is run by fans, the turnstiles are manned by fans
but we seem to have a much more corporate outlook. Why
is that and isn’t there savings that could made there?
DD:
We used to do it but things have moved on so much since
then. When the LSA bought this up three weeks ago they
recognised that things had changed and that it’s a lot
to ask fans to turn up not just for the matches but for
the regular training that’s now required AND do it all
for nothing. So then you get into deciding whether to
pay them or not but you can’t, because you’d need to pay
minimum wage.
We’ve looked at doing it by giving fans merits as
rewards, like going on the bus with the players, it’s a
good idea but we still have to look at service delivery.
What happens if they don’t turn up? I’ve still got to
open the ground and I’ve still got to meet the
regulations laid down by the police and the local
authorities.
One misnomer is that these people are stewards not
security men so they cant physically stop people going
onto the pitch, indeed there’s been cases at ground in
London where people have prosecuted stewards who have
done that. On the other hand there are cases where
stewards have been injured in cases like that and
claimed against he company. If you think back to the
Stockport County game, there was ample opportunity for
injury to take place and we’re expecting volunteers to
take care of that? I think people have got to stop, take
out the emotion of the game and put the sensible hat on.
It’s very difficult.
If you look at the turnstiles we used to have those fan
run. The difficulty for us is the amount of money we
take since we changed over has risen considerably. I
know other clubs that have found since they changed over
from fans to an employee basis suddenly found they were
taking forty percent more money. It all works at the
moment and to change that means I’ve got to be certain
that the service I’m getting is the same.
We do use fans to do different things for us but I
always pay them the cost of it. Simply because if I get
something printed I want to be able to go back if it’s
bad and say this isn’t what I wanted. If you have a
volunteer doing it, it’s bloody difficult to say
actually this is a poor performance – do it again. I’m
saying that from my own bitter experience.
I’m not saying it can’t be done but it is difficult and
it needs to be done in such a way that we get good value
for money.
QPRnet.com:
Do you think Goldrange give us good value for money?
DD:
If you look at it they have worked at Fulham, Brentford
and Watford and they were looking after the England team
in Turkey. That indicates they are pretty good at what
they do otherwise they wouldn’t get those contracts.
However if you are paying minimum wage for a fairly
tedious job you are always like to get foreign labour in
London today. We’re not being paranoid over the problems
that that brings with it, but we do expect them to speak
English as good as us, as well as have knowledge of the
layout of the ground, understand the evacuation
processes and turn up on time. That makes any exception
to this an issue for us.
QPRnet.com:
What happened with the recent FA charge and where does
that leave us?
DD:
Over the last four years we’ve been reported on nineteen
different occasions and they go from the sublime to the
ridiculous. We’ve been reported for someone throwing on
orange onto the pitch. The orange was nowhere near a
player, it was taken from the field of play to the away
dug out where the assistant manager proceeded to eat it.
That went in the referee’s report. If it had been a
banana I think people would understand that potentially
has some overtones to it, but an orange?
On the other hand Clayton Ince was struck by a coin and
bled. During the same game we had to intercept a fan who
was trying to get on the field to attack the referee. A
few games before that Tony Butler got a coin in the eye.
In my view these are serious incidents.
For those reason we were asked to explain ourselves.
They walked round the ground, they looked at the CCTV
camera’s and security arrangements. They gave us a heavy
fine which has been suspended and they are making the
point that this has happened and we need to make sure it
doesn’t happen again.
I came out feeling a bit sore because I felt we’d gone
as far as many clubs go. We’d got a good report form
the football licensing authority and from the police,
our level of stewarding is pretty high so we do what we
can but ultimately if you think about the mechanism’s of
someone throwing a coin there might be hundreds of
people with their hands in the air at the same time.
Could you, could anyone say “it was him your honour”.
Very difficult.
It’s would be very easy to say if Andy Hall had refereed
the Crewe game differently then it might not have
happened. I strayed into that territory and got slapped
down pretty quickly. They are very clearly saying that
our crowd’s behaviour is a concern to them, whether
that’s fair or unfair isn’t for me to judge, I’ve got to
live with the consequences. That’s why tonight’s program
includes a behavioural statement and it’s got to be in
there every game, because that’s what they’ve told us to
do.
QPRnet.com:
Fans are becoming increasingly more agitated about the
work of the directors. What would be your message to
us?
DD:
I’ve been privileged to live through some of the most
troubled times this club has known. There are some
people out there that think they understand what
happened and have got part of the truth but haven’t got
it all.
What I would say is there is a huge amount of goodwill
for this club up and down the country and we are
perceived to have turned the corner. We’ve got an
opportunity to band together and the only people who are
going to stop are ourselves. So rather than take pot
shots at each other do you not think we ought to be
pulling together in more cohesive ways.
So a banner was put out, alright so I stand down and
someone else comes into my position and the fans that
put the banner up expect the new person to still do the
same job I do, be a fan from birth and inevitably accept
less money for doing it. In addition they think the new
person is going to hit the ground running you can think
again because this is a complex business and you’d have
a period of time where they settle in finding the kettle
and toilets etc. At this time you are not able to give
the leadership to the company and, in my opinion, that’s
clearly not good for the club.
I understand it that people want to feel a part of
things because it’s their club, it’s their passion, it
sends them to sleep at nights and wakes them up
in the mornings, but ultimately why we have been
successful is that we have stuck together and done the
best thing for the club from a business perspective.
For example last season when some people were calling
for a change of manager, it made no sense from a playing
perspective or financially and with the support of the
fans the team came round and look what was achieved
We, any of us, are nothing more than custodians for this
club going forward, it’s not mine, it’s not Nick’s, it’s
not yours, it’s everybody’s. So I would beseech everyone
to bury whatever hatchet they have and work together.
This goes to the LSA and to the Trust too. There
shouldn’t be a Hoops Fund that’s only supported by the
trust because ultimately it’s too small, this initiative
should be viewed by all supporters whatever there
personal feelings over the Trust movement as a worthy
initiative. It needs to be preaching to the biggest
possible church to get the best value. Unfortunately,
currently this is not happening.
People have criticised me for taking Vic Gibbons to
court but I absolutely think that was the right thing to
do. People have got to respect what this club is about
and I don’t want people to mistreat it. We’ve come too
far in the last five years to have people treat it like
it’s an amateur club. It’s a professional club, it’s got
good people in it and I’m dammed if I’m going to have
people treat it like Noname United playing in an amateur
league. It’s not why you wear the shirt, it’s not why
you run a website. You do these things because you love
what we’ve stood for over a long period of time and as
your Chief Executive I’m passionate about everything
we’re trying to achieve here but I’m dammed if I’m going
to have people treat us badly. It’s got to stop, we’re
strong enough now to stand up and say that’s wrong, it’s
manifestly wrong. |