Loans only in January.

[SimpleTactics]

If it is true and only loans are available then we are getting relegated. Simple as that.

[RidgeRider]

Okay fine - whatever. I have no right to be worried. How very dare I?
God forbid I criticise or show a lack of faith in our fearless Chairman.
All I am saying is that I am concerned his reasoning for buying FFC does not have the success of FFC at it's core.
How can this be proved? Well I would suggest letting us go down due to a lack of investment might be one sign.
So let's see how this all pans out.

I think this forum is full of a bunch of sheep! Blind sheep!

WW, you have every right to be worried, as do the rest of us. I think we are all very concerned about survival. Some feel we need to give the new Chairman a chance to show his cards. Our previous Chairman essentially starved us over the past 3 seasons and we survived so let's give this a guy a window to do it.

He has recently hired 3 top coaches to run his team on the pitch, and to help bring in talent, and fired another (along with his coaches which cost some dose to do). That is costing him more than was planned at the seasons start I'm sure, and we have added Dempsey, so it's not like the man is standing still.

Even if we only do loans in the window, it will depend on what we get, to see if it's ambitious or workable. Next summer is the best time to turnover the squad but I surely hope we can add some REAL quality in January and the Chairman will prove to us he is will taking "paranoid" action in keeping us in this league.

[Wimbledon_White]

Indeed; it makes no sense to let us go down. His investment would be worthless effectively.

However look at it this way; what do 'businessmen' do?
They maximise profits/minimise losses by cutting the cloth accordingly.

Is it really that stupid to think that Khan might believe we can exist and be "sustainable" on a shoe-string? On a budget of loans and aged Prem players?
MAF was doing it to make the club's books look more attractive to buyers. Khan might be doing it to keep costs low to maximise potential profits/minimise losses. After all, we are only a little side-show to the Jacksonville main event.

Cynical? Pessimistic?
Guilty as charged.

[Denver Fulham]

It won't surprise me at all if we get minimal investment this window and the same in the summer if we stay up.

As I said I reckon Khan will want us to feed off scraps only. After all, "sustainability" is the order of the day.

I don't trust the man as far as I can throw him.

Evidence the owner is cheap: He hasn't spent a penny in the zero full transfer windows under his ownership. In other words, no evidence.

Evidence the owner is not cheap: He authorized the sacking of a manager and hired two additional staffers to help out his new head coach.

It's fun to come up with wild conspiracy theories, or we can just wait for facts. And even if the club doesn't invest in this window to the satisfaction of many, that's still not evidence of ulterior motive. He may just believe, on the advice of his operations team, that we have enough to survive, and they want to wait until the summer to thoroughly overhaul the roster.

You may not like it, but that may happen. It's fun to lob baseless assertions out, but right now the fault lies with MAF and the transfer policy of the last three windows, not with Mr. Khan.

[ToodlesMcToot]

Rubbish assessment of Fulham whoever wrote this.
Much needed, midfield? They look fine recently, when the right players are out there. A whole new back 4 is needed. Goals against confirm this.

Without Parker, we were hopeless. We are in dire need of quality central midfield help. Same with central defense.

[Denver Fulham]

"Sustainability" - Khan's favourite word.
No purchases beyond the 'bargain basement' in the summer.
Stek=free
Amorebieta=free
Parker=£bargain basement
Boateng=free (and before Khan anyway so irrelevant)
Bent=loan
Taarabt=loan

Stek cost north of 4m pounds. Parker was like 3.5m. Bent and Taarabt have hefty paychecks that have pushed our wage bill to the allowed limit, per FFP. We had a net spend of probably 10m or more this summer.

At least get facts correct while you express concern? We're all concerned, and that concern will build if we don't get 3 points on Wednesday. That said, Wednesday's lineup will (likely) include Berbatov, Parker, Riether, maybe Taarabt, maybe Dempsey, etc. And then we have a month to get in better bodies in key places elsewhere. You can't believe management doesn't realize we need a center back and a center mid, at minimum? How they acquire those players is up to them and their expertise, not ours.

[Wimbledon_White]

It won't surprise me at all if we get minimal investment this window and the same in the summer if we stay up.

As I said I reckon Khan will want us to feed off scraps only. After all, "sustainability" is the order of the day.

I don't trust the man as far as I can throw him.

Evidence the owner is cheap: He hasn't spent a penny in the zero full transfer windows under his ownership. In other words, no evidence.

Evidence the owner is not cheap: He authorized the sacking of a manager and hired two additional staffers to help out his new head coach.

It's fun to come up with wild conspiracy theories, or we can just wait for facts. And even if the club doesn't invest in this window to the satisfaction of many, that's still not evidence of ulterior motive. He may just believe, on the advice of his operations team, that we have enough to survive, and they want to wait until the summer to thoroughly overhaul the roster.

You may not like it, but that may happen. It's fun to lob baseless assertions out, but right now the fault lies with MAF and the transfer policy of the last three windows, not with Mr. Khan.

Correction: He has hired two 'staffers' who have been out of work for significant periods of time, probably on low wages.

Let's see what signings he authorises this January and next summer. I won't hold my breath, we'll be feeding on scraps again no doubt.

Incidentally I agree re MAF; he was starving us to make the books look more attractive to potential buyers.

[Wimbledon_White]

"Sustainability" - Khan's favourite word.
No purchases beyond the 'bargain basement' in the summer.
Stek=free
Amorebieta=free
Parker=£bargain basement
Boateng=free (and before Khan anyway so irrelevant)
Bent=loan
Taarabt=loan

Stek cost north of 4m pounds. Parker was like 3.5m. Bent and Taarabt have hefty paychecks that have pushed our wage bill to the allowed limit, per FFP. We had a net spend of probably 10m or more this summer.

At least get facts correct while you express concern? We're all concerned, and that concern will build if we don't get 3 points on Wednesday. That said, Wednesday's lineup will (likely) include Berbatov, Parker, Riether, maybe Taarabt, maybe Dempsey, etc. And then we have a month to get in better bodies in key places elsewhere. You can't believe management doesn't realize we need a center back and a center mid, at minimum? How they acquire those players is up to them and their expertise, not ours.

Apologies re Stek; I honestly thought it was a free.

My point remains though, we fed from scraps last summer.

[Classic94]

 :blow candles:

Rubbish assessment of Fulham whoever wrote this.
Much needed, midfield? They look fine recently, when the right players are out there. A whole new back 4 is needed. Goals against confirm this.

Without Parker, we were hopeless. We are in dire need of quality central midfield help. Same with central defense.

Yep, we must strengthen the spine of the team - CB, CM, ST. Add to this a full-back and possibly a winger. It will be a busy month.

[Denver Fulham]

WW, I just don't see what Mr. Khan was supposed to do yet to show ambition. He tried to stick with a manager, and finally sacked him. Performances have been way better under Rene, the second half at Hull notwithstanding. He's added staff to help Rene.

"Loans only" can mean a lot of things. If we canceled Bent's loan and took on Ashley Young for five months, would that be bad? What about a loan for Alexander Buttner? Or loaning a center mid who wants first-team starts ahead of the World Cup?

People get too caught up in transfer fees. I'm not saying we don't need new players, nor that we don't need to buy a good number of players to help transition the roster. But in the January window, with the way prices are for transfers, a couple of strong 5-month loans may be the better path to the only goal at this point: 17th place or better.

Survive, and then you have four months over the summer to implement a much more drastic overhaul.

Whatever the method, I'd be stunned if we don't add a center back and a deep-lying midfielder. It's painfully obvious we are very short in both areas. If we can add a winger, too, great. We already have two months of Dempsey in hand.

[ToodlesMcToot]

"Sustainability" - Khan's favourite word.
No purchases beyond the 'bargain basement' in the summer.
Stek=free
Amorebieta=free
Parker=£bargain basement
Boateng=free (and before Khan anyway so irrelevant)
Bent=loan
Taarabt=loan

So net spend thus far is negligible.
He endlessly talks about sustainability which, reading between the lines, means very little spending on players.

Added to this all the NFL Jacksonville bullsh1t we've had to endure both online and at matches (cheerleaders and their Mascot Jaguar thing) the signs might suggest that we.'re not his priority.

I'll never forget the email I got REMINDING me to go to the Cottage Cafe for a showing of the Jacksonville Jaguars love match at Wembley.

I may have no proper evidence but I genuinely believe I will be proved right in all of this. Khan is pulling the wool over our eyes.

Well, if one must pit the NFL franchise against the EPL club for "daddy's" attention, then why wouldn't the NFL franchise get more attention. It was a far greater financial investment. And, it has far greater potential for generating revenue.

But pitting one against the other isn't a necessity for Khan. He has people he trusts to run both and will invest what is prudent and allowable into both more than likely. The man knows how to make money and likely takes pleasure in the making of it. He didn't invest in Fulham to see his 150 million investment decrease or to see that 60 or so million pound annual payday from the league disappear.

I wish someone would show me the logic that explains how watching one of those investments go down the drain provides Mr Khan with some sort of net gain.

[supersimmo123]

I dont think this window signifies Khans intentions at all. Everyone knows that January is a bad time to do business. There are at least 10 mid table prem teams on the hunt for a striker for example, price will go up. Khan knows the man in charge currently is only until the end of the season so loans would make sense. Listen loans are good short term. Short term is what we as a club have to look at. The club can't afford to splash the cash until the summer with the threat of relegation. Should we stay up, which I believe we will if we continue to play like we have recently (Hull the exeption) I think khan will get the checkbook out in the summer. God knows we need it! But in all seriousness loans can be very good business! Look at Reither great business. Think of it as a try before you buy! For instance everyone was moaning we didn't just sign Bent, I think 99% of us agree now that we are glad we didn't shell out for him. I'm sure if the right player comes up at a price that is good we will go in. Trust the club as in the past we have done well in the window! Stay positive guys!

[bmasar]

For instance everyone was moaning we didn't just sign Bent, I think 99% of us agree now that we are glad we didn't shell out for him.

Very good point.

Two other notes: Zverotic was bought under Khan. Not expensive of course, but should be counted regardless. Also, NFL does twice the business as the next closest global pro league, the PL. So of course the Jaguars are the main area of his concern. Sad but true.

Source: http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_200/218b_sports_business.html

[Wimbledon_White]

For instance everyone was moaning we didn't just sign Bent, I think 99% of us agree now that we are glad we didn't shell out for him.

Very good point.

Two other notes: Zverotic was bought under Khan. Not expensive of course, but should be counted regardless. Also, NFL does twice the business as the next closest global pro league, the PL. So of course the Jaguars are the main area of his concern. Sad but true.

Source: http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_200/218b_sports_business.html

And is that acceptable for us?
Do we not want to be the priority to our owner?
Why are we making do?!

[YoungsBitter]

The lassitude of this journalism is evident by the comment that Cardiff have £10mm to spend, Tan has stated clearly that not a penny will be spent; this article is total crap. We have just seen Khan commit to Wilkins and Curbs so I expect him to make funds available for the right player and Saturday's performance just demonstrated in spades how thin the squad is. Loans are good if makes sense but we are so desperate for new blood in certain key positions CB, CM, LB etc that I have to believe we will see thoughtful purchases. Apart from anything else we are maxed out on domestic loans anyway.

[jmh]

Rubbish assessment of Fulham whoever wrote this.
Much needed, midfield? They look fine recently, when the right players are out there. A whole new back 4 is needed. Goals against confirm this.

Remember when Hodgson was manager and Fulham conceded very few goals?  That was because the midfield helped out the defenders instead of running around all over the place and leaving the defenders exposed like the guys we have now.

Anyway, there's no basis for the original article's assertion that our budget is "loans only" so I wouldn't make too much of it.

[YankeeJim]

Where would we be without speculation? That, and all those who have solid, factual comments. For that matter, without speculation we wouldn't need any forums even one as good as this one.

Chicken Little comes to mind. 051

[hesedmedia]

For instance everyone was moaning we didn't just sign Bent, I think 99% of us agree now that we are glad we didn't shell out for him.

Very good point.

Two other notes: Zverotic was bought under Khan. Not expensive of course, but should be counted regardless. Also, NFL does twice the business as the next closest global pro league, the PL. So of course the Jaguars are the main area of his concern. Sad but true.

Source: http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_200/218b_sports_business.html

And is that acceptable for us?
Do we not want to be the priority to our owner?
Why are we making do?!

You should put a bid in.

[bmasar]

For instance everyone was moaning we didn't just sign Bent, I think 99% of us agree now that we are glad we didn't shell out for him.

Very good point.

Two other notes: Zverotic was bought under Khan. Not expensive of course, but should be counted regardless. Also, NFL does twice the business as the next closest global pro league, the PL. So of course the Jaguars are the main area of his concern. Sad but true.

Source: http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_200/218b_sports_business.html

And is that acceptable for us?
Do we not want to be the priority to our owner?
Why are we making do?!

The point wasn't the amount spent on Zverotic. It's that you're misrepresenting your arguments with incorrect and omitted evidence.

We can be a priority of the owner without being the top and only priority. In layman's terms, it's called "a self-made billionaire being able to do more than one thing effectively". Your conspiracy theory is based on ZERO full transfer windows, a press report and a hunch. And then we, of course, become sheep.

[Wimbledon_White]

For instance everyone was moaning we didn't just sign Bent, I think 99% of us agree now that we are glad we didn't shell out for him.

Very good point.

Two other notes: Zverotic was bought under Khan. Not expensive of course, but should be counted regardless. Also, NFL does twice the business as the next closest global pro league, the PL. So of course the Jaguars are the main area of his concern. Sad but true.

Source: http://www.askmen.com/sports/business_200/218b_sports_business.html

And is that acceptable for us?
Do we not want to be the priority to our owner?
Why are we making do?!

The point wasn't the amount spent on Zverotic. It's that you're misrepresenting your arguments with incorrect and omitted evidence.

We can be a priority of the owner without being the top and only priority. In layman's terms, it's called "a self-made billionaire being able to do more than one thing effectively". Your conspiracy theory is based on ZERO full transfer windows, a press report and a hunch. And then we, of course, become sheep.

We'll just have to wait and see won't we?
He talks a good game does Khan but he has shown nothing to make us think he will invest properly in playing staff; indeed even the backroom staff he has brought in are all out-of-work has beens.
I truly believe we're feeding off scraps, loans and cheap old players for the foreseeable future.
At least we'll be sustainable...in the Championship / League One.