Mr. Hart: Loftus Road was formed in 1996 as a vehicle to purchase Queens Park Rangers Football Club and what is now London Wasps Rugby Club. It bought both companies simultaneously in August 1996. It then floated on the Alternative Investment Market in October/November 1996, comprising a placing and public offer.
TWST: What's happening in the market for you? What's the business
climate?
Mr. Hart: The general sporting business climate is very difficult. There
are certain clubs whose customer base and success on the field allows
them to make significant operating profits, but there are very few of
those. Most other sporting clubs really try to balance with spending as
much as they can to improve their performance on the pitch within
available resources, with a view that if the teams get better then they
can ascend the leagues and therefore achieve greater rewards - certainly
this is on football, not so much on rugby. And to a certain extent it's
a chasing the tail argument, because the higher you go, the more it's
perceived that you need to spend to maintain your position in the higher
echelons. I think that the business climate itself has got two things
going on: the first thing on the income side is the way that television
and Internet are moving, and in particular the value of the club's
broadband TV rights in the future, because I think that ultimately one
will be able to see any QPR home match via a mobile phone, television or
Internet, whilst paying a subscription for it. Obviously that opens up
the marketplace world-wide and provides significant direct income
opportunities and additional back spin-off opportunities in terms of
merchandise. Some Premier League clubs already have their own TV
stations anyway. I think the key is for us and any club to understand
its rights and make sure they are not sold off as part of any collective
bargaining. The other things affecting the business climate is the
reduction in the football transfer market, following the Bosman ruling.
A great many clubs previously survived by making operating losses but
selling their better players every one to two years. They were allowed
to do this because pre-Bosman, a club would retain a player's
registration even if he wasn't contracted to them, and he could not go
and play for anyone else without there being a fee involved. Post-
Bosman, when a player reaches the end of his contract he's a free agent,
rather like it works in the States; and what that has done is,
initially, given the players a great deal of power to realise their
value at the end of a contract as a free agent been paid. The players
have looked at that as a way that there can be a substitution, to a
certain extent, of transfer fee into wages. Now, that's certainly true
for top players; it's less true for the lower down players. I think
certain players have got to the end of their contract and have gone out
trying to look for vastly improved contracts and they've not been
successful. The other thing with the transfer market has meant the
opening up of Europe to free agents coming over. So generally, there are
fewer transfers now than there were previously, because there's more of
a marketplace for clubs to seek their players. It has just made it more
difficult to sell players. The other thing in the business climate is
the slow realisation amongst the football clubs that with the reduction
in transfer activity, they need to be far more rational in terms of
their operating business and the losses that they can sustain, in terms
of what they can afford to pay in wages, and in terms of maximising
every form of income that they can generate from their facilities.
Recently reported administrative receiverships of clubs like Swindon,
Crystal Palace and certain other clubs, show that a lot of clubs are
over-extended. So far, rich backers have come in to bail these clubs
out. I believe that there are only so many rich backers, and the extent
of bailing them out may change in the future.
Tickers included in this excerpt: LFT.L
For more information call (212) 952 7433. The Wall Street Transcript does not endorse any of the comments made by interviewees, and does not make stock recommendations.