News:

Use a VPN to stream games Safely and Securely 🔒
A Virtual Private Network can also allow you to
watch games Not being broadcast in the UK For
more Information and how to Sign Up go to
https://go.nordvpn.net/SH4FE

Main Menu


Shahid Khan giving ‘serious consideration to selling Fulham’

Started by WhiteJC, August 19, 2017, 09:17:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

CincyFulham1

Talk of Shahid Khan selling Fulham is rubbish

American owner is not looking to sell Whites, despite national newspaper's claims

Get West London understands that suggestions Shahid Khan is considering selling Fulham are rubbish.

A story in the Times yesterday reported that the Whites owner was 'seriously considering' selling the west London outfit.

Khan bought the Cottagers from Mohamed Al-Fayed in 2013 and his son Tony was made vice-chairman and director of football operations just last year.

We understand that any talk of a sale is false, however, with the Khan family keen to take Fulham back into the Premier League.

The Fulham Supporters' Trust, who enjoy a good working relationship with the club, released a statement saying they believed the story was "without foundation".

It read: "The Fulham Supporters' Trust were surprised to read a story in yesterday's Times by the paper's deputy football correspondent, Matt Hughes, stating that Shahid Khan was interested in selling Fulham Football Club.

"The Trust has worked hard since Mr Khan's purchase of Fulham in 2013 to build a constructive working relationship that has allowed us to communicate the views of Fulham fans to the Club's ownership and decision makers.

"We are heartened by Mr Khan and Fulham Football Club's desire to retain their key players, such as captain Tom Cairney, and Ryan and Steven Sessegnon, as well the continued investment in Motspur Park and Craven Cottage. We believe the story that was published in the Times to be totally without foundation."



http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/talk-shahid-khan-selling-fulham-13502925

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: CincyFulham1 on August 21, 2017, 04:10:08 PM
Talk of Shahid Khan selling Fulham is rubbish

American owner is not looking to sell Whites, despite national newspaper's claims

Get West London understands that suggestions Shahid Khan is considering selling Fulham are rubbish.

A story in the Times yesterday reported that the Whites owner was 'seriously considering' selling the west London outfit.

Khan bought the Cottagers from Mohamed Al-Fayed in 2013 and his son Tony was made vice-chairman and director of football operations just last year.

We understand that any talk of a sale is false, however, with the Khan family keen to take Fulham back into the Premier League.

The Fulham Supporters' Trust, who enjoy a good working relationship with the club, released a statement saying they believed the story was "without foundation".

It read: "The Fulham Supporters' Trust were surprised to read a story in yesterday's Times by the paper's deputy football correspondent, Matt Hughes, stating that Shahid Khan was interested in selling Fulham Football Club.

"The Trust has worked hard since Mr Khan's purchase of Fulham in 2013 to build a constructive working relationship that has allowed us to communicate the views of Fulham fans to the Club's ownership and decision makers.

"We are heartened by Mr Khan and Fulham Football Club's desire to retain their key players, such as captain Tom Cairney, and Ryan and Steven Sessegnon, as well the continued investment in Motspur Park and Craven Cottage. We believe the story that was published in the Times to be totally without foundation."



http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/talk-shahid-khan-selling-fulham-13502925

Where do these ratty journalists get off making up rubbish? What do they hope to get out of it? The national newspaper (The Times?) must get sources for their stories and if so, they need to check them (same source as Charliejonessports?) as they are bogus. I could make up a story... In fact I will... News UK wants to sell The Times... there we go equally as rubbish as their story.

MJG

The source of the info given to the The Times was not from the club or Khan's or anyone remotely related to the club. It was given to the juno  there to cause instability at the club for whatever reason that individual had.
Just the views of a long term fan


YankeeJim

Quote from: Baszab on August 19, 2017, 10:43:32 AM
He has been trying to offload for over 2 years

It is well known in Florida business circles

I posted this 2 years ago and took considerable criticism amid accusations of slander

He has no interest in the business and it's is a plaything for his son

However we do now have a strong squad and a great manager - but SJ knows it's top 6 or the sack (again) this year


You contradict yourself. The first four lines are the usual anti Khan claptrap and then you say "However we do now have a strong squad and a great manager ". Why would the first four be true if the last one is?
Its not that I could and others couldn't.
Its that I did and others didn't.


beijing ben

Quote from: MJG on August 21, 2017, 05:00:59 PM
The source of the info given to the The Times was not from the club or Khan's or anyone remotely related to the club. It was given to the juno  there to cause instability at the club for whatever reason that individual had.

That was my guess and it worked. Hopefully the knock on effect will be to actually galvanise everyone. If I was one of the khans I would be straight down the training ground telling the squad not to believe it and that we are 100 per cent behind you all, etc, etc. A good opportunity to contribute to confidence...


Snibbo

1. I still don't get the anti-Khan venom and why people would want this to be true.
2. If he was looking to get out, surely he would have cashed in on the likes of Cairney and Sess. Cash in the hand is king.
3. If he was looking to get out surely he wouldn't have invested in the likes of Fonte, Ojo, Cisse, Norwood etc.
4. Be careful what you wish for. There will of course at some stage be another owner, and there's no guaranteeing they'll be an improvement.
5. It seems to me that Khan, after the terrible first few years, has now put in place very professional processes and staff. To me, we now look like a well-run club and I'm sure results will follow.

Disclaimer : of course I could be completely naive and a really bad judge of character, and the club might be sold to Ernie Clay mark II tomorrow.

e4b

Good post Snibbo I agree with all you have said,including the disclaimer.

paulbrookersmazydribbles

I had a statement on this from the Trust emailed to me last night. It was quite strident:

"The Fulham Supporters' Trust were surprised to read a story in yesterday's Times by the paper's deputy football correspondent, Matt Hughes, stating that Shahid Khan was interested in selling Fulham Football Club. We note that yesterday afternoon the story was amended to include a quote from a Fulham Football Club spokesperson insisting that 'Mr Khan has no intention of selling Fulham Football Club'.

The Trust has worked hard since Mr. Khan's purchase of Fulham Football in 2013 to build a constructive working relationship that has allowed us to communicate the views of Fulham fans to the Club's ownership and decision makers. This has led to what has been recognised by the Government and Supporters Direct as one of the strongest structured relationships in British football.

We are heartened by Mr. Khan and Fulham Football Club's desire to retain their key players, such as captain Tom Cairney, and Ryan and Steven Sessegnon, as well the continued investment in Motspur Park and Craven Cottage. We believe the story that was published in the Times to be totally without foundation. We look forward to working closely with Fulham Football Club to further our structured relationship over the coming months."


Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: paulbrookersmazydribbles on August 22, 2017, 09:27:32 AM
I had a statement on this from the Trust emailed to me last night. It was quite strident:

"The Fulham Supporters' Trust were surprised to read a story in yesterday's Times by the paper's deputy football correspondent, Matt Hughes, stating that Shahid Khan was interested in selling Fulham Football Club. We note that yesterday afternoon the story was amended to include a quote from a Fulham Football Club spokesperson insisting that 'Mr Khan has no intention of selling Fulham Football Club'.

The Trust has worked hard since Mr. Khan's purchase of Fulham Football in 2013 to build a constructive working relationship that has allowed us to communicate the views of Fulham fans to the Club's ownership and decision makers. This has led to what has been recognised by the Government and Supporters Direct as one of the strongest structured relationships in British football.

We are heartened by Mr. Khan and Fulham Football Club's desire to retain their key players, such as captain Tom Cairney, and Ryan and Steven Sessegnon, as well the continued investment in Motspur Park and Craven Cottage. We believe the story that was published in the Times to be totally without foundation. We look forward to working closely with Fulham Football Club to further our structured relationship over the coming months."

Interesting the inclusion of Steven Sessegnon in that as a key player...

Chutney

If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
C O Y W

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.

What's the issue with handing us to his son? Don't all business leaders delegate?


MJG

Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?
Just the views of a long term fan

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: MJG on August 22, 2017, 02:00:00 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?

LOL +1

Some people on this board do say silly things.

Holders

I don't think that the suspicion and doubt about Khan would be so high if he just communicated better.
Non sumus statione ferriviaria


Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: Statto on August 22, 2017, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:06:28 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 22, 2017, 02:00:00 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?

LOL +1

Some people on this board do say silly things.

There's a difference between putting your son on the board with very high level oversight, as MAF did, versus putting your son in charge of player recruitment, something traditionally within the manager's, scouts' and/or DoF's mandate (in any case an experienced football professional, probably an ex-player).

Let's be clear, what Khan has done is only one step away from insisting we play his sister up front against Ipswich.

I'm happy with his ownership overall but I don't think what Chutney has said is "silly"

To suggest his son who runs a sports data company TruMedia Networks being put in charge of recruitment is any where near his hypothetical sister being played up front against Ipswich is also silly. In fact it's beyond silly.




Chutney

Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: Statto on August 22, 2017, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:06:28 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 22, 2017, 02:00:00 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?

LOL +1

Some people on this board do say silly things.

There's a difference between putting your son on the board with very high level oversight, as MAF did, versus putting your son in charge of player recruitment, something traditionally within the manager's, scouts' and/or DoF's mandate (in any case an experienced football professional, probably an ex-player).

Let's be clear, what Khan has done is only one step away from insisting we play his sister up front against Ipswich.

I'm happy with his ownership overall but I don't think what Chutney has said is "silly"

Suggesting his son who runs a sports data company being put in charge of recruitment is any where near his sister playing up front against Ipswich is also silly. In fact it's beyond silly.





My point is, be it silly or not, that there is no need to panic about Khan selling, as long as the person he sells to the right person, it could well end up being a good thing, we just don't know.

Regarding the original question about MAF and his Son, no, I would not be happy had MAF put his son in charge of our recruitment.

C O Y W

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 02:28:16 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: Statto on August 22, 2017, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:06:28 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 22, 2017, 02:00:00 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?

LOL +1

Some people on this board do say silly things.

There's a difference between putting your son on the board with very high level oversight, as MAF did, versus putting your son in charge of player recruitment, something traditionally within the manager's, scouts' and/or DoF's mandate (in any case an experienced football professional, probably an ex-player).

Let's be clear, what Khan has done is only one step away from insisting we play his sister up front against Ipswich.

I'm happy with his ownership overall but I don't think what Chutney has said is "silly"

Suggesting his son who runs a sports data company being put in charge of recruitment is any where near his sister playing up front against Ipswich is also silly. In fact it's beyond silly.





My point is, be it silly or not, that there is no need to panic about Khan selling, as long as the person he sells to the right person, it could well end up being a good thing, we just don't know.

Regarding the original question about MAF and his Son, no, I would not be happy had MAF put his son in charge of our recruitment.

Would you rather somebody like TK running recruitment or that we go down the road that Palace have just gone down and appoint an ex-player like Dougie Freedman who literally is the definition of a failed manager?

If it's the second one, then I despair.


Chutney

Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:31:53 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 02:28:16 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: Statto on August 22, 2017, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:06:28 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 22, 2017, 02:00:00 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?

LOL +1

Some people on this board do say silly things.

There's a difference between putting your son on the board with very high level oversight, as MAF did, versus putting your son in charge of player recruitment, something traditionally within the manager's, scouts' and/or DoF's mandate (in any case an experienced football professional, probably an ex-player).

Let's be clear, what Khan has done is only one step away from insisting we play his sister up front against Ipswich.

I'm happy with his ownership overall but I don't think what Chutney has said is "silly"

Suggesting his son who runs a sports data company being put in charge of recruitment is any where near his sister playing up front against Ipswich is also silly. In fact it's beyond silly.





My point is, be it silly or not, that there is no need to panic about Khan selling, as long as the person he sells to the right person, it could well end up being a good thing, we just don't know.

Regarding the original question about MAF and his Son, no, I would not be happy had MAF put his son in charge of our recruitment.

Would you rather somebody like TK running recruitment or that we go down the road that Palace have just gone down and appoint an ex-player like Dougie Freedman who literally is the definition of a failed manager?

If it's the second one, then I despair.

I'd prefer we give our manager and his staff the final say on the players we bring in, as it is them who decides if they play or not and them that know best what the team needs. So not the second one. Craig Kline is currently able to overrule Jokanovic, who do you trust more to judge a players ability?

I just think its a silly policy to sign players the manager has no intention of using and doesn't want. Final say on a player joining should be with Jokanovic, this clearly isn't the case while TK is in charge of recruitment.
C O Y W

Marcel_Gecov

Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 02:37:00 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:31:53 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 02:28:16 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: Statto on August 22, 2017, 02:14:36 PM
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on August 22, 2017, 02:06:28 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 22, 2017, 02:00:00 PM
Quote from: Chutney on August 22, 2017, 01:41:21 PM
If Khan was to sell, and we were to get an owner who considers us as more than a side project and actually gets involved themselves rather than handing us down to his son, surely that's a good thing?

Khan selling isn't the risk here, its who he sells to.
MAF's plan as he told us was to pass it on to his remaining son, but of course that didn't happen. Would you have been happy with that?

LOL +1

Some people on this board do say silly things.

There's a difference between putting your son on the board with very high level oversight, as MAF did, versus putting your son in charge of player recruitment, something traditionally within the manager's, scouts' and/or DoF's mandate (in any case an experienced football professional, probably an ex-player).

Let's be clear, what Khan has done is only one step away from insisting we play his sister up front against Ipswich.

I'm happy with his ownership overall but I don't think what Chutney has said is "silly"

Suggesting his son who runs a sports data company being put in charge of recruitment is any where near his sister playing up front against Ipswich is also silly. In fact it's beyond silly.





My point is, be it silly or not, that there is no need to panic about Khan selling, as long as the person he sells to the right person, it could well end up being a good thing, we just don't know.

Regarding the original question about MAF and his Son, no, I would not be happy had MAF put his son in charge of our recruitment.

Would you rather somebody like TK running recruitment or that we go down the road that Palace have just gone down and appoint an ex-player like Dougie Freedman who literally is the definition of a failed manager?

If it's the second one, then I despair.

I'd prefer we give our manager and his staff the final say on the players we bring in, as it is them who decides if they play or not and them that know best what the team needs. So not the second one. Craig Kline is currently able to overrule Jokanovic, who do you trust more to judge a players ability?

I just think its a silly policy to sign players the manager has no intention of using and doesn't want. Final say on a player joining should be with Jokanovic, this clearly isn't the case while TK is in charge of recruitment.

I feel like we've gone back in time. We dont have a manager, Joka is a head coach. Its a different job description. Fulham have guarded themselves against having to tear up our plans should SJ leave. It's the correct decision. Most managers come in and want to buy their own players which causes wastage. This way the manager comes in and knows that he wont have final say and it's transparent. Which player have we signed that Joka wont play on current evidence? Djalo? Who's started 1 out of 5 games (and probably will tonight) and been on the bench for the other 4. I actually would trust Kline to judge what the club can afford and play with a budget accordingly which he has done well. It can almost be guaranteed that Kline will be here after SJ and as such is building a team with more of an eye to long-termism.