|
A horrible day. QPR fans woke up to the breaking news
that, 14 years on from the last proposed merger, another was on the cards.
This time it wasn't Fulham, but Wimbledon. Different club, same reaction.
So, first, a press release - in which we state our opposition
to the proposed merger and promise to fight it all the way. We do so in
the belief that the overwhelming majority of QPR fans will be opposed
to such an idea. "Working to protect the identity of and future of Queens
Park Rangers". That is the platform on which we launched QPR 1st. Here
then is our first big test. We are an organisation just three weeks into
existence, still sifting through close to 2,000 registrations and putting
in place a truly democratic 'one member, one vote' set-up. In that time,
we have had a thousand people turn up to a public meeting and provide
overwhelming support for the idea of setting up a supporters trust.
We have backing from the government, from the FA, the
Football League, and the PFA. We receive support from the council, from
the Mayor, from the local MP, and from the Shepherds Bush business community.
We now have the voting power of over two million shares pledged. Of course,
that is insignificant compared to Chris Wright's majority shareholding,
but as a meaningful lobby of small shareholders, it is a hugely significant
figure.
So the wording of the press release, then. We promise
to fight any merger. It is our unshakeable belief that it is something
the overwhelming majority of QPR fans are opposed to and state as much.
Predictably, from some, there is criticism that we don't represent the
views of ALL the fans - not something, to the best of our belief and knowledge,
we have ever done. There are those who in favour of a merger, we accept
that. And indeed respect their views.
But we're a democratic organisation, and the messages
of support from people registering support for QPR 1st merely confirm
our unshakeable belief that the majority of QPR fans oppose a merger.
It is all very well arguing that, if looked at unemotionally, the merger
is a good business proposition. Which of course it is. But you can't conveniently
take the emotional aspect out of the equation. Choosing to support a football
club is not a cold decision. It's one that comes from the heart, and is
pursued via an emotional roller-coaster. That's the appeal, the very essence
of supporting a club. Those of us who came to the fore to take QPR 1st
forward - not just for our own benefit, but for all QPR fans who share
our beliefs and visions - bleed blue and white. If you love something
- truly love something, even if it is only a football club - then you'll
not only nurture it, you'll fight tooth and nail to protect it. We are
QPR. We are not QPR incorporating anyone else.
The amount of vitriol that comes our way because of that
stance is astonishing. There are ridiculous suggestions that we knew about
the merger three weeks ago, although nothing to explain why we would wish
to keep that to ourselves. We are accused of everything from being "unrepresentative"
(don't think so!) to being a cosy little clique with all sorts of hidden
agendas (not so). What an insult that is to those who have pledged support
for QPR 1st, numbers which are rising rapidly every day. In fact so vitriolic
is it at times, that you would be forgiven for thinking it was almost
orchestrated. At least we always put our proper names to, for example,
postings on the Internet. It's interesting that so much of the criticism
of QPR 1st comes from anonymous sources. Fine, democracy means that those
who support the merger are entitled to form their own collective voice.
Let them come to Molineux on Sunday and canvass support.
So the wording of the press release contains no prevarication.
As a responsible organisation, of course we have to listen to the proposals
with an open mind. But they are splashed all over the newspapers, and
in turn reproduced on the Internet. There's nothing in the proposals to
make us believe the majority of QPR fans will view this merger any differently
to the one in 1987, or significantly oppose it any less.
The merger story in the Sun can, we decide, be looked
at from one of three perspectives. Firstly, that it is the route Chris
Wright and the administrators are set on. In which case, it is something
that will inevitably be fought by fans of both clubs. Secondly, it is
a story deliberately leaked to the press and designed to create a smokescreen
whereby the fear of merger tempts a firm bid to the table. So far, we
are told, there have been 30 or so expressions of interest in buying QPR
but no firm bid tabled. Nothing like a good scare story to propel potential
buyers into action. Thirdly, it is a classic negotiating tactic - present
a worst case scenario, then downgrade it to something not quite so unpalatable,
but something which in itself would have met opposition. A groundshare
perhaps? A sell-off of Loftus Road and QPR groundsharing somewhere else?
A move to a new stadium? It's all guesswork, but the meeting with Chris
Wright this evening will present an opportunity to sort out some fact
from fiction. Or not as the case may be.
*************
The meeting with Chris Wright and representatives from
QPR 1st, had been agreed a week or more beforehand. The objective of it
was to obtain first-hand information about his plans and intentions for
QPR. It was also to convey the aims and objectives of a supporters trust
and take the first step in what we hope will eventually lead to a 'listening
club' - not one that merely pays lip service to the notion that the fan-base
should be an inclusive part of the way the club is run, not peripheral
to it. But of course the merger was now the key issue to address.
Would the story coming out in the papers (a coincidence
or timely?) and the protests which had gone on all day, both outside Loftus
Road and at the FA, scupper the meeting. We assembled, nine of us from
the Interim Commitee, there representing QPR 1st, but equally drawn from
across the broad spectrum of QPR support, incorporating the LSA, shareholders,
webmasters, and A Kick Up The R's. Even up to the last minute we were
waiting to confirm the location of the meeting. As it transpired, Nick
Blackburn and Chris Wright came to us, not us to them
Nick Blackburn arrived first, and proceeded to tell us
about the thinking behind the proposed merger. It seems it was first mooted
at Selhurst Park after the 5-0 defeat by Wimbledon. He describes it as
an idea discussed "half-heartedly" and as a "bit of a joke". They are
not words, we are quick to point out, that are particularly appropriate
to the future of our football club. It seems the idea was then discussed
further at QPR board level and a more formal approach made to Wimbledon.
Nick Blackburn said that the QPR board felt that, due to the financial
difficulties facing the club, it was a proposal that merited a further
look.
He asked us if we saw any merit in the merger or if the
whole thing was the worst idea in the world? The latter, we informed him.
Even if a merger meant come August we would be able to watch a team "wearing
hoops" at Loftus Road, but with 'Wimbledon' incorporated into the club
name, playing Manchester City in front of 20,000 fans, rather than QPR
playing Bristol City in front of 8,000? Especially not if meant a team
wearing hoops at Loftus Road, but with Wimbledon incorporated into the
club name, playing Manchester City in front of 20,000 fans, we assured
him. QPR then, QPR now, QPR always, to steal a line. We would rather watch
QPR at the bottom of Division Three having retained our own identity,
than watch some hybrid, mongrel club at any level. The continual use of
the word 'hybrid' began to annoy Nick Blackburn after a while, we felt.
Hybrid, mongrel, or whatever - what guarantee was there that the new amalgamated
club would be successful. There were, we reminded him, alternative ways
to fill a stadium. That was one of the ways in which QPR 1st could contribute.
(Dare we suggest that a full stadium week in, week out is the wish of
every QPR fan, or do we need to acknowledge that there are perhaps some
fans who only want a half-full stadium?)
Chris Wright arrived not too long after. He sat down,
and invited us to fire questions at him, anything we wanted to know. He
would answer as honestly as could, he assured us. Tell us the precise
situation QPR are in now, we invited.
He began by explaining the injuries which had blighted
our season and eventually led to relegation. No, he wasn't happy with
the performances, but impending relegation and the consequential worsening
financial difficulties, whereby the club were potentially trading insolvently,
forced the club into administration. Chris Wright is an engaging speaker
in the surrounds of a less formal setting such as this, but there is still
a feeling that you give him a cue and the well-rehearsed lines come out
one after another. The product of a man who has been interviewed a thousand
times, and forgiveable for that alone. There was nothing he said that
any of us hadn't heard before. Until of course the point when he got to
the merger.
He reiterated Nick Blackburn's views that it was merely
an idea, one in fact that he himself had decided three days beforehand
was a non-starter. Even so, he believed that many Football League clubs
were looking at the possibility of merger - many Football League club's
CHAIRMAN he agreed, after interjection on our part - and used the two
Sheffield clubs as an illustration of how two medium sized clubs could
merge to compete as one powerful one in a 50,000 stadium. The assumption
that it would be a FULL stadium was one that didn't go unchallenged. Nor
did Nick Blackburn's earlier suggestion that Loftus Road would be heaving
with 20,000 punters desperate to see Quimbledon, or whatever the name
was. More like a tenth of that, we suggested. And no support away from
home.
It was always, he assured us, the club's intention to
seeking the views of season ticket holders, shareholders and members,
and the merger would only proceed if there was a significant majority
against the idea. It would all have depended on the results of a ballot.
And of the way it was worded, we interjected. It would have been a straightforward
poll, he responded, and if the verdict had been anti-merger then he saw
no way that QPR could go down that route.
We expressed shock that someone who is a fan, and around
in 1987, should even begin to entertain a merger - a horrible word to
QPR fans. Had the protests today come as a surprise to Chris Wright? No,
they hadn't. Was he aware that whilst we might be sitting around the table
in a calm manner, there were many, many very angry fans out there, some
of whom were planning further protests both at Wolves on Sunday, and also
at Loftus Road on Sunday? He didn't doubt it.
He was now talking in the past tense, we pointed out.
Did this mean that no ballot would take place? The story breaking in the
Sun, he felt, had scuppered any rational debate on the merits of the merger,
so no it was not an option that the club would now persue. In any case
the strength of feeling demonstrated at the ground, on the messageboards,
and around the table here this evening had confirmed his own private feelings
that a merger is not the way forward.
So what is the way forward? He confirmed that he would
continue to fund the club until October, but of course a buyer may well
come in tomorrow. And after October if no firm bid is recieved? What contingency
plans did he have? None, was the short answer. But he stated he would
not allow QPR to go bust. What conditions did he place on the sale? For
example, would he consider selling Loftus Road separately to QPR? He promised
he would do everything in his power to keep the two together.
What about the Wasps deal, which included Twyford Avenue
as well? It seems he had kept Wasps out of the administration process
as league rules meant any rugby club in administration would immediately
be kicked out the league. The reason for buying the two was to reduce
the debt linked to QPR, and therefore make it a more attractive proposition
to any potential bidder. Would he agree to a clause whereby any bidder
wanting to buy Wasps as part of the package could buy them and the training
ground for the same price Chris Wright had paid. No, on balance, that
wasn't something he was prepared to agree to. What about conditions of
sale? What criteria, apart from bidders having the money, would he place
on any sale? Again he thought it inappropriate to impose conditions on
any sale but stated that he would ensure himself that any bid was the
right deal for QPR. Did that include the City consortium who had made
their interest public earlier that afternoon? They and anyone else who
put in a firm bid, he stated.
Chris Wright wasn't the only person who had lost money
with the collapse of the share price. He was though in a better position
to shoulder the loss than many. What was his feelings on that? He was
very sorry, of course, but football shares had performed poorly everywhere
and we weren't the only club to suffer. What about accusations that he
was really only interested in Wasps all along and that he has no interest
in what happens to QPR? It was something he denied totally. Why had he
used the incident at the Fulham game to step down as chairman and leave
the club effectively rudderless? You are a rich businessman with diverse
interests, we pointed out, surely you have not got where you are today
without developing a thick skin? Anything but, he said, I am a very sensitive
person, not thick-skinned at all. I take criticism very hard. I am used
to dealing with singers, DJ's, actors - creative people. My skills lay
in nurturing talent. But, yes, he agreed, the one thing QPR needed then,
and needs now, is a 'hands-on' chairman. But it can no longer be himself.
He had, we reminded him, actually got very little flak from the fans,
certainly in comparison with chairmen at other clubs.
We talked about the concept of a supporters trust and
what in-put one can have into the running of a football club. Both Chris
Wright and Nick Blackburn stated they were receptive to the idea, and
that they would be prepared to meet with QPR 1st on a regular basis. For
now, on a weekly basis, we pitched? Fortnightly would be more realistic,
given his full diary, responded Chris Wright. With that, and hour and
a quarter after arriving, he was gone. Off to the BBC to give an interview
to Radio Five.
The verdict of the meeting with him? He had given us a
clear, unequivocal undertaking that there would be no merger with Wimbledon
or any other club. He also stated that he would continue to do the best
for QPR but it is always hard to pin someone down to hard specifics if
they don't want to be pinned down. And the impression, as it always is
with Chris Wright, is that he doesn't want to be pinned down. But the
'no merger' agreement was unequivocal enough - and all we can do is take
that at face value. For now. No-one is under any illusions that there
is a bigger game being played here. All we can really do is ensure to
the best of our limited abilities that QPR fans are not treated as a pawn
in all this, but as a major player whose views about the future of our
club are paramount.
As we left the meeting and went home, Chris Wright was
on Radio Five, saying much the same as he'd said to us. Merger had never
been a serious issue, and he himself had big reservations about it. It
would never have gone through without the backing of the fans anyway -
and, no, it was "extremely unlikely" a ballot would now take place. No
mention that the majority verdict had already been given anyway. All part
of the game, of course, and one only just begun.
Dave Thomas (Fri May 5th 2001)
|