Forest, Villa or Rangers | Vital Football

Forest, Villa or Rangers

Any chance of translating it. I’m on iPad and can’t figure it out.

Here you go...

QSI, owner of PSG, has views of Roma ... and England
>PSG|Laurent Perrin @lperrinparisien|April 10, 2019, 15:52|Update: April 10, 2019, 18h57|0
8050380_8151c6b0-5b92-11e9-accf-1c031e4d9ccb-1_1000x625.jpg
Nasser Al-Khelaïfi, president of PSG and QSI, remains on the lookout for any opportunities that arise and may decide to invest in Italy or England. LP




As Qatar's Corriere Dello Sport has revealed, Qatar is interested in taking over AS Roma. But it is rather in England that he could embark on new investments in football.


Will Qatar increase its influence on European football? Qatar Sport Investments (QSI), owner of the PSG and chaired by Nasser Al-Khelaïfi, is studying several issues on which the Emirate would be willing to invest.
As the Corriere Dello Sport unveiled, one of the tracks leads to AS Roma. The Italian newspaper mentioned an offer - refused - € 400 million, which the current owner James Pallotta, an American billionaire, denied. However, according to our information, the link between Qatar and Roma is real. As it happens to him very regularly, the Emirate was asked by a merchant bank mandated to find new investors to the Italian club.

Qatar is already established in the United Kingdom
QSI remains attentive to the evolution of the Roman file, but it is especially in the Channel that its desire for expansion could quickly be translated. Qatar has a strong presence in the United Kingdom, where it owns the legendary Harrods store. Second division clubs, which have a strong brand, would offer the Emirate very good prospects for development. For example, Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa or Queens Park Rangers.
And already has a club in Belgium
For Qatar, setting out to conquer England would be a new way to strengthen its presence on European football. This is of course materialized by the PSG but also by Eupen , in Belgium, led by Claude Makelele and property of the Aspire Academy.
In the event of a repurchase of a club of international stature, Qatar will have to find the solution to guarantee its independence in the eyes of the European authorities, whose regulations specify that "no physical or moral person can have the control or exert influence on more than one club participating in UEFA competitions. "
The previous Red Bull
Red Bull, the majority owner of Leipzig and Salzburg, cleverly found the parade. The Austrian energy drink brand, which owns 100% of Salzburg and owns 49% of the shares of RB Leipzig, has put a non-profit organization at the head of the German club, of which around 20 members are employed by ... Red Bull. Corriere Dello Sport does not indicate that Qatar Sport Investments (QSI), the owner of the PSG, is the author of the recent takeover bid.
 
Probably just thrown our name in there, given previous Fawaz ownership - doubt there is any substance.... but you never know.
 
London...
Means little

Ground holds 20,000 and it is harder to find space for a new one in London.

Plenty of London clubs with small fanbases because there are plenty of London clubs. 3 of the big six are London. Too much competition.

Personally I would put my money into somewhere like Birmingham or Bristol.

Nothing in this as far as we are concerned. Might not be anything in it full stop as far as Europe is concerned

What is the motivation? Make an English club super successful and they'll end up competing with PSG for the Champions League. What's the benefit in that?
 
Means little

Ground holds 20,000 and it is harder to find space for a new one in London.

Plenty of London clubs with small fanbases because there are plenty of London clubs. 3 of the big six are London. Too much competition.

Personally I would put my money into somewhere like Birmingham or Bristol.

Nothing in this as far as we are concerned. Might not be anything in it full stop as far as Europe is concerned

What is the motivation? Make an English club super successful and they'll end up competing with PSG for the Champions League. What's the benefit in that?
Easy to do it when you buy the best team in the country. More kudos if you do it in one of the top European leagues, particularly if they start lower down.

These days owning a club is a vanity project although if you do it right you can raise the profile of your companies significantly.
 
I could see us being attractive to foreign investment and Im surprised we havent had more interest from Asia especially as we already play in red..add to it our history Im amazed weve only seen dubious interest.
 
Easy to do it when you buy the best team in the country. More kudos if you do it in one of the top European leagues, particularly if they start lower down.

These days owning a club is a vanity project although if you do it right you can raise the profile of your companies significantly.
What's the purpose of doing that twice though?

PSG's owners are basically the state of Qatar. PSG are the equivalent of their "national" team. Their success is meant to reflect on the state.

What's the point in having two?

I could understand if it was about money and driving sales of something in the UK market, but it isn't.

Can't both win the CL. Can't both sign the same £200m galactico
 
I could see us being attractive to foreign investment and Im surprised we havent had more interest from Asia especially as we already play in red..add to it our history Im amazed weve only seen dubious interest.
Don't want anything to do with Asia.

The Asian owners so far have generally been extremely dubious. Leicester are the main exception.

Middle Eastern owners have generally been far more reliable- forest being the main exception
 
What's the purpose of doing that twice though?

PSG's owners are basically the state of Qatar. PSG are the equivalent of their "national" team. Their success is meant to reflect on the state.

What's the point in having two?

I could understand if it was about money and driving sales of something in the UK market, but it isn't.

Can't both win the CL. Can't both sign the same £200m galactico
As I say it’s about ego. Easy to get the top team in France back to the top but taking a sleeping English club to the top, that’s a whole different level.

They will find some way of owning two clubs and there are plenty of players to go around...
 
Don't want anything to do with Asia.

The Asian owners so far have generally been extremely dubious. Leicester are the main exception.

Middle Eastern owners have generally been far more reliable- forest being the main exception
And Wolves so far.
 
An all-time points table of the old Football League years shows London clubs at numbers two, six, seven and 16 in the top 30. Fast-forward to the Premier League era and London clubs are leaping out at numbers two, three, five, 11, 15, 20, 21 and 28. London may not be sweeping the honours, but it is hoovering up the space in between.

And why? Money. Simple as that, Money. London is a city built on money - and let's be honest QPR's record (mediocre as it is) is far superior to ours. Gates are secondary to the equation.

Look at the owners we attract:

Con Men
Local lad done well
Con man
Alleged ------ ---------

We can whine about our two stars, our decent gates all we like but ultimately we're a limited provincial club, with no success in the modern era and nothing but a black hole to any owners pocket.
 
Other than being in London QPR have nothing over us. What have they won ever? Virtually nothing so they have even less history than us and Villa have been sold to Billionaire investors recently..if it was us or QPR and I had a billion it would be going on us without any bias on brand recognition alone.
 
Other than being in London QPR have nothing over us. What have they won ever? Virtually nothing so they have even less history than us and Villa have been sold to Billionaire investors recently..if it was us or QPR and I had a billion it would be going on us without any bias on brand recognition alone.

You'd be wrong then.