I have written an article on Fulham's finances setting the picture for the accounts that are due to be released in next few days. Usually i would paste it on here but there are a number of graphics.
If you wish to comment or give any feedback please do so.
http://www.vivaelfulham.co.uk/articles/fulham-a-financial-look-at-what-went-wrong--7-587.html (http://www.vivaelfulham.co.uk/articles/fulham-a-financial-look-at-what-went-wrong--7-587.html)
This is brilliant
Quote from: Baszab on March 30, 2015, 10:30:42 PM
This is brilliant
Thanks very much. Hope you found it informative and helped give some background to the club.
It pretty much shows how misguided the clubs strategy has been over the last decade. We seem to have looked as a club on the very short term without any plan beyond the season we were in. It is not as if we have had increased income from broadcasting but we have wasted much of it in short termism.
The last few years has been a disaster. What is worrying is that the disaster was almost a well planned strategy in itself.
What is sad is that we didn't even need the in depth look to realise it.
Excellant article. I'm a sad person I love accounts and finance
Quote from: Lighthouse on March 30, 2015, 11:13:12 PM
It pretty much shows how misguided the clubs strategy has been over the last decade. We seem to have looked as a club on the very short term without any plan beyond the season we were in. It is not as if we have had increased income from broadcasting but we have wasted much of it in short termism.
The last few years has been a disaster. What is worrying is that the disaster was almost a well planned strategy in itself.
What is sad is that we didn't even need the in depth look to realise it.
Agreed, we could see it happening right in front of us. Countless threads on here and elsewhere pointed out the short term fits and asked questions, but got no answers from the club, or just ignored.
Quote from: Berserker on March 30, 2015, 11:19:09 PM
Excellant article. I'm a sad person I love accounts and finance
Was it clear enough and easy to understand? I tried to strip all the figures back to make it easier for fans to get hear heads around.
Quote from: MJG on March 30, 2015, 11:22:34 PM
Quote from: Lighthouse on March 30, 2015, 11:13:12 PM
It pretty much shows how misguided the clubs strategy has been over the last decade. We seem to have looked as a club on the very short term without any plan beyond the season we were in. It is not as if we have had increased income from broadcasting but we have wasted much of it in short termism.
The last few years has been a disaster. What is worrying is that the disaster was almost a well planned strategy in itself.
What is sad is that we didn't even need the in depth look to realise it.
Agreed, we could see it happening right in front of us. Countless threads on here and elsewhere pointed out the short term fits and asked questions, but got no answers from the club, or just ignored.
I've always said, 25,000 fans could see it coming, but the Club didn't, or chose to simply ignore it.
Quote from: MJG on March 30, 2015, 11:26:58 PM
Quote from: Berserker on March 30, 2015, 11:19:09 PM
Excellant article. I'm a sad person I love accounts and finance
Was it clear enough and easy to understand? I tried to strip all the figures back to make it easier for fans to get hear heads around.
I did CIMA so ok for me understsnd. But yes it was very clear
Agree this is excellent, factual but not overly judgmental. It will be interesting to see how things pan out this year. Are we already in danger of breaching FFP simply because of our legacy wage bill? Or did we do enough by removing quite a few of the top earners? Did the loan deals for Stek And Mitroglou off-set all, some, or not very much of their FFC pay packets? And of course, what are the implications for next year with at least Hugo and Ruiz being out of contract? (ie surely freeing up quite a big number from the payroll)
Fantastic article well balanced and easy to understand.
I think the transfer policy over the last three years of the premiership is indeed mind boggling large wages with no re sale value is a recipe for disaster
Quote from: Whitesideup on March 31, 2015, 07:58:15 AM
Agree this is excellent, factual but not overly judgmental. It will be interesting to see how things pan out this year. Are we already in danger of breaching FFP simply because of our legacy wage bill? Or did we do enough by removing quite a few of the top earners? Did the loan deals for Stek And Mitroglou off-set all, some, or not very much of their FFC pay packets? And of course, what are the implications for next year with at least Hugo and Ruiz being out of contract? (ie surely freeing up quite a big number from the payroll)
think last season will be a disaster wages wise, only saved by the extra 15m we got with the TV deal.
I think actually with the loans out and massive cut to the Senior playing squad we are fine with FFP this season and as I have said before we had money in January to spend.
We did the hard work last summer wages wise, look at what Wigan had to do this past January, they gave it a year and failed. We had to do it sooner or later, it was poor signings that made this policy fail this season.
It's essential we get promotion next season otherwise I think we can forget about it for quite a while.
Quote from: Berserker on March 30, 2015, 11:32:12 PM
Quote from: MJG on March 30, 2015, 11:26:58 PM
Quote from: Berserker on March 30, 2015, 11:19:09 PM
Excellant article. I'm a sad person I love accounts and finance
Was it clear enough and easy to understand? I tried to strip all the figures back to make it easier for fans to get hear heads around.
I did CIMA so ok for me understsnd. But yes it was very clear
Christ, it's Monday Again.
Thank you, that was very useful, and as you say, long had the fans speculated that a lack of forward planning was always going to bite Fulham on the b*m sooner rather than later.
Excellent article, thank you for your work. It emphasises how important the academy and the scouting staff will be going forward. Looking on the bright side, as all the clubs in the Championship will be in similarly affected by FFP, having the best academy should mean, all other things being equal, that in the long term we have the better chance of promotion. But it is likely to take many frustrating years as we will have to sell to fund running expenses. It looks as though the best way any investment Khan is able to make should be in youth - and it does look as though the club realise that with the recruitment of several 16-17 year olds in the last year or so.
Patience, not normally found in a football supporter's DNA, is called for.
As others have said, I think we had all come to the same general conclusion but it's interesting to see all the detail that supports that gut feeling.
To be fair to those that worked or are working for the Club, they probably saw the short termism of it all but they had a very demanding Owner. I worked for him a number of years ago and the amount of department heads that came and went. Those that managed to stay did it his way and never questioned anything. Couple that with the fact that once in the Premiership you have to do it their way. Spend, spend, spend. That spend mentality got us to a European final and some of our highest top division finishes and we didn't grumble did we?
I thought we were in for a great season. Lots of young talent raring to go but it's another division with its own set of rules that is hard to break. After reading all the figures and analysis from MJG. I think I've been a little hard with my complaints about the Club, most of it to do with on field. Considering its a new owner, the legacy of the previous one, several managers, cuts and redundancies that effect a companies moral they haven't done too bad all things considered.
As an old Fulham supporter I remember the days when it used to be two bob to get in (10 pence).Can anyone recall cheaper than this?If I'd have given a tenner they would have asked me what player I wanted to buy!!!!
Good article - thanks MJG
Can you confirm though, I thought the new stand money was put aside a season or two ago? If so, How does this affect turnover this coming year, please?
Pretty poor reading and would suggest there's no hope of returning to the top flight, unless FFP relax the policy quite a bit for rich owners.
If you are correct that we need at least one big sale a year, our chances of building a good, young squad is somewhat folly! Everytime we get an exciting preospect they will be off, even if they maybe would have chosen to stay?
Quote from: BestOfBrede on March 31, 2015, 09:28:40 AM
Good article - thanks MJG
Can you confirm though, I thought the new stand money was put aside a season or two ago? If so, How does this affect turnover this coming year, please?
Pretty poor reading and would suggest there's no hope of returning to the top flight, unless FFP relax the policy quite a bit for rich owners.
If you are correct that we need at least one big sale a year, our chances of building a good, young squad is somewhat folly! Everytime we get an exciting preospect they will be off, even if they maybe would have chosen to stay?
Been told the money for the stand is there, but in all honesty I think it will need a loan or cash input. It's not in the accounts anywhere at this time although there are probably legal costs in other expenditure section of the accounts.
When I talk about selling a youngster a year I'll use Roberts as an example.
We have to bring in at least five players this summer. Now with the wages cut we should be within FFP guidelines. But if we sold Roberts for say £10m (which we wont) then the only way a sustainable plan can work is to use some of that money 3/4 of it to buy new players to invest in. It's extra money to supplement what we can spend.
The trick is always having that player or buffer in the accounts that allows reinvestment every year. We have to be honest and admit we can't afford to spend 10m on one player. We need to be smarter and make it two or even three players.
Financially I think Khan will do things spot on. I suppose it's hoping he gets the right advisors footballing wise thats the big thing.
Thank you for the detailed analysis.
A critical change in the figures for which I cannot quite work out the cause in the 17% rise in wage costs for 2010-2011.
Can anyone explain that for me please?
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on March 31, 2015, 10:10:44 AM
Thank you for the detailed analysis.
A critical change in the figures for which I cannot quite work out the cause in the 17% rise in wage costs for 2010-2011.
Can anyone explain that for me please?
Hughes and his bus load of hangers on don't come cheap.
Also I suspect the players had incentive rises in their contracts that kicked in following the Europe final. Plus new players coming in would have been paid more to be at same level.
What about shirt sales and the like? do we make a lot of money from them? This is a good article. Do you reckon we will post a loss from the last season in the prem. I reckon we will be ok money wise this season, we got a lot of our wage bill.
Quote from: fulhaman on March 31, 2015, 11:11:41 AM
What about shirt sales and the like? do we make a lot of money from them? This is a good article. Do you reckon we will post a loss from the last season in the prem. I reckon we will be ok money wise this season, we got a lot of our wage bill.
Shirts sales etc would be counted in the commercial side of the accounts.
Would selling a player like mitro be enough this summer. I heard that we are wanting still 10 million for him, so maybe this will help with our transfer wages pile this summer.
Good read.Appreciate the time and effort put in.Hopefully after getting rid of all the deadwood and their salaries we will be in a position to make some decent acquisitions in the summer.With the parahachute payments and the Chairman allowed to put in extra funding we could have a decent transfer kitty.It will be interesting to see if he decides to put his hand in his pocket and until then i am going to give him the benefit of the doubt.Regarding the new stand i agree that we dont actually need it now but believe we should start its construction.My reasoning being it would show that Khan is in for the long haul.It also wouldn't effect FFP and lets face it he can afford it.When constructed we would benefit from extra revenue from commercial side(riverside cafe/restaurant/bar etc.)Plus when we get to premier league hopefully sooner rather the later it could be used to its full potential.
Quote from: MJG on March 31, 2015, 10:26:39 AM
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on March 31, 2015, 10:10:44 AM
Thank you for the detailed analysis.
A critical change in the figures for which I cannot quite work out the cause in the 17% rise in wage costs for 2010-2011.
Can anyone explain that for me please?
Hughes and his bus load of hangers on don't come cheap.
Also I suspect the players had incentive rises in their contracts that kicked in following the Europe final. Plus new players coming in would have been paid more to be at same level.
It must be that but it was a significant jump followed by further rises in the following two years. The departures last summer need to have a counterbalancing effect and take the wage bill back down to levels near £50m or preferably below I suspect.
Well, dannyboi was after the post of the month, and I think this is it.
A superb article Mr MGJ, very clear. And very scary. Particularly the wage as a percentage of revenue stat...
An extremely interesting and well written piece. The analysis is so sound and has the correct balance of impartiality and yet concern for the club. Following on from the analysis your points about promotion ( next season ) and the need for any money to be spent - not on one player at £10 m, but on three or so for that figure are most insightful. Hopefully the appointment of Rigg will help deliver such thinking and action within the club. If not then that is just another additional wage bill for little or no return ( but Khan appears to be trying to not make any more howlers with such an appointment )
Great stuff MJG !
Good article.
The pattern of the finances fits with the changes in policy at the club and the initial comments from MAF about sustainability.
Clearly there was a change in direction with money spent on infrastructure (e.g. the upgrading of Motspur Park and subsequent spend on plans, etc. for the Riverside) rather than on the first team (such expenditure should be reflected on the Balance Sheet rather than in the Profit and Loss statement). At the same time player investment was mainly for the Academy.
As a strategy, moving from buying to developing players makes sense. Unfortunately the lead time to develop players from the Academy appears to have been longer than expected leading to on-going increases in players ages and wages.
Looking forward there are likely to be some real financial issues for Premier League clubs when the next TV rights are negotiated. At the last round Sky agreed to pay 80% more for the same coverage while BT paid 15% more for increased coverage. It is unlikely that Sky will do the same again unless some competition can be created. Therefore it is quite likely that Sky will reduce their bid at the next renewal. If that happens it is likely to be a major disaster for a lot of the Premier League clubs.
Overall, being relegated may just be what we needed to get our finances in order and avoid the problems that any significant reduction in TV money would bring.
Thanks for an excellent, well set out article. I'm much better informed as aresult. What worries me in particular is that it looks like we won't have any money to invest in new players. Patrick Roberts to Liverpool/ Arsenal perhaps?
This is excellent MJG, and is why you sit in my box of well respected Fulham supporters! Fascinating read.
The saddest part is, after the Euro success, it was not rocket science to turn Fulham into a solid mid table premier team for a long time to come. It surely is not difficult to develop that strategy. We will never become the Manchester of the south but we could have become like Everton. Always there, always hoping, never really succeeding but in the premier for decades.
The whole thing points to serious mismanagement. The closest to any northern team we have mirrored is Middlesborough. Mid table, Euro final, owner stops writing cheques followed by relegation.
Superb post by the way.
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on March 31, 2015, 11:57:45 AMQuote from: MJG on March 31, 2015, 10:26:39 AMQuote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on March 31, 2015, 10:10:44 AMThank you for the detailed analysis.
A critical change in the figures for which I cannot quite work out the cause in the 17% rise in wage costs for 2010-2011.
Can anyone explain that for me please?
Hughes and his bus load of hangers on don't come cheap.
Also I suspect the players had incentive rises in their contracts that kicked in following the Europe final. Plus new players coming in would have been paid more to be at same level.
It must be that but it was a significant jump followed by further rises in the following two years. The departures last summer need to have a counterbalancing effect and take the wage bill back down to levels near £50m or preferably below I suspect.
Do you want to be shocked.... Derby's wages for 2013-14 when they got to the playoff final were £13.5m up from £10.5m in 12/13.
Our wages in 12/13 were 66.5m
Our wages in 13/14 are going to be 70-75m
So think about how much we had to cut to get our wages even down to what I think it needs to be and that's in the 20-30m region for this season.
Quote from: MJG on March 31, 2015, 03:40:30 PM
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on March 31, 2015, 11:57:45 AM
Quote from: MJG on March 31, 2015, 10:26:39 AM
Quote from: Apprentice to the Maestro on March 31, 2015, 10:10:44 AM
Thank you for the detailed analysis.
A critical change in the figures for which I cannot quite work out the cause in the 17% rise in wage costs for 2010-2011.
Can anyone explain that for me please?
Hughes and his bus load of hangers on don't come cheap.
Also I suspect the players had incentive rises in their contracts that kicked in following the Europe final. Plus new players coming in would have been paid more to be at same level.
It must be that but it was a significant jump followed by further rises in the following two years. The departures last summer need to have a counterbalancing effect and take the wage bill back down to levels near £50m or preferably below I suspect.
Do you want to be shocked.... Derby's wages for 2013-14 when they got to the playoff final were £13.5m up from £10.5m in 12/13.
Our wages in 12/13 were 66.5m
Our wages in 13/14 are going to be 70-75m
So think about how much we had to cut to get our wages even down to what I think it needs to be and that's in the 20-30m region for this season.
Someone said they could see the changes in policy and sustainability. Well it may be happening in terms of youth recruitment but, as you indicate, it certainly isn't showing much impact on the accounts.
Not only do we have a high wage bill due to those on PL salaries but we also have a large squad with still several players surplus to requirements.
It would be interesting to couple this excellent analysis of the financial side of the accounts with that of transfer strategy.
This would likely be a lot of work - and difficult to do given that we could only see it on a macro level - but tying the wage and transfer financials to some analysis on our incoming and outgoing transfers such as average age of purchases vs sales and standard deviation of these ages could be quite enlightening.
I would theorize that the average age of our incoming transfers has actually been relatively steady over the past 8 years or so and that the big change has been in the standard deviation i.e. previously we were buying more 23-28 year olds but over the past 3 years our spending has been primarily focused on 30+ year old players and teenagers for the academy (to try and become "sustainable"). This would result in a pretty similar average incoming transfer age, but the types of players coming in would be vastly different and based on recent evidence yield significantly poorer results.
A very informative read.
Hope it opens a few peoples eyes as to the whys and wherefores of running a football club and stop certain supporters just saying "Khan get your cheque book out"
PS. I'd still like to know who wanted/sanctioned the Mitroglou deal.
Excellent article, seems we walked into it, and we'll almost certainly pay a heavy price for the mis management of our club. I fear we'll be down here a long time
Superb article, thank you.
Can't help but feel reading that that someone got the transfer strategy terribly wrong. All the 30+ players with no sell on is madness. meanwhile we've been signing up 17 year olds like there's no tomorrow. Couldn't someone have looked at say Moussa Dembele and thought well there's a good idea, good player at a a playable age and we make a profit when we sell.
Rigg has got a very big job this summer, probably one of the most important close reasons in our recent history.
This is a fine piece, well done. Just one disagreement worth the mention.
You suggest Khan would not be permitted to do anything like the same as MAF and spend £200 million over 16 years (much of it recouped in the end.) Actually he could.
Financial Fair Play from next season allows Championship owners to fund £13 million of loss per season, a major increase. Nor would spending on the Riverside development count towards that loss.
So even with FFP there's still a huge gap in financial muscle between clubs with rich owners and those without -- if the owner cares to stump up. One may not necessarily wish Fulham to take that route again, but, it's permitted. For chapter and verse, see here:-
www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/29940463 (http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/29940463)
Quote from: b+w geezer on March 31, 2015, 06:10:17 PM
This is a fine piece, well done. Just one disagreement worth the mention.
You suggest Khan would not be permitted to do anything like the same as MAF and spend £200 million over 16 years (much of it recouped in the end.) Actually he could.
Financial Fair Play from next season allows Championship owners to fund £13 million of loss per season, a major increase. Nor would spending on the Riverside development count towards that loss.
So even with FFP there's still a huge gap in financial muscle between clubs with rich owners and those without -- if the owner cares to stump up. One may not necessarily wish Fulham to take that route again, but, it's permitted. For chapter and verse, see here:-
www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/29940463 (http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/29940463)
I take the point and I was not really looking 16 years ahead but yes the rules do change next year and it would allow us to show losses, on a par with the worst losses we had in the PL. I don't think that's a route we want to go down.
Having looked closely at some championship accounts I see no reason why with the right purchases we can't challenge next season. But I stress it has to be next year for me due to the parachute payments. As you know it drops year on year and already we are 5m down season on season with next season payment.
Back to your main point, it maybe does come across that Khan can't invest, but if it's all about sustainability then we may have to work our way around things without it.
An interesting view which seems pretty spot on. If we struggled with crowds of +23,000, I wonder how clubs like Brentford and Bournemouth would manage with ground capacity of less than 12,000.
I agree with all that (said by MJG two responses above here). What's possible is one thing, what's desirable is different -- in the long term anyway. Sixteen years of subsidy @ £13 million p.a. is surely on no-one's agenda....
...but a year or two to help us return to the prem, well maybe. And if Khan and his people felt that that would help to protect their original investment, then we might even see it happen. One ought at least to be aware the rules permit it.
I certainly commend your piece as an overview of life latterly in the prem. Many years ago, I attempted similar and confirm that it is a lot of work and essentially depressing too! But highly informative. Well done again.
If Khan is in for the long run, which I think is a fair assessment ( his US businesses will be doing better now as the US economy continues to grow, car sales up etc so no pressure for cash in the short term) he has some options open to him. Not the least would be to fund the Riverside development with loans which could be structured to minimize balance sheet impact and FFP. As MJG's analysis shows come what may we need to increase capacity to maximise the revenue if/when we get back into Prem, but even in the Championship I would assume the additional hospitality options bring in much needed cash and London being what it is there are fair amount of businesses looking for entertaining options for visitors and a suite at Craven Cottage may be a reasonably attractive option.
My first reaction on reading Mike's article though was that the story to me read like really bad commercial mismanagement over the last 4-5 years. Managers will always look to sign their favorite players and so the GM must negotiate the best deal he can for the club, bringing some balance. But it looks like under Jol that stopped happening and almost seemed out of control with Magath. I thought Alistair McIntosh was a real coup for us to get such an accomplished administrator but upon reflection he has been less than impressive in his dealings with too many over the hill passengers on high wages, no sell on value and topped off with the Mitroglou farce. I am not surprised that Kahn brought in Grigg and pushed him into non football matters like the Riverside project.
As much as Symons has been criticized for not pulling the trigger in January I am actually pleased that we did not go back down a path of repeating earlier bad judgements in getting poor value in a panic.
Quote from: YoungsBitter on April 01, 2015, 12:13:10 AM
If Khan is in for the long run, which I think is a fair assessment ( his US businesses will be doing better now as the US economy continues to grow, car sales up etc so no pressure for cash in the short term) he has some options open to him. Not the least would be to fund the Riverside development with loans which could be structured to minimize balance sheet impact and FFP. As MJG's analysis shows come what may we need to increase capacity to maximise the revenue if/when we get back into Prem, but even in the Championship I would assume the additional hospitality options bring in much needed cash and London being what it is there are fair amount of businesses looking for entertaining options for visitors and a suite at Craven Cottage may be a reasonably attractive option.
My first reaction on reading Mike's article though was that the story to me read like really bad commercial mismanagement over the last 4-5 years. Managers will always look to sign their favorite players and so the GM must negotiate the best deal he can for the club, bringing some balance. But it looks like under Jol that stopped happening and almost seemed out of control with Magath. I thought Alistair McIntosh was a real coup for us to get such an accomplished administrator but upon reflection he has been less than impressive in his dealings with too many over the hill passengers on high wages, no sell on value and topped off with the Mitroglou farce. I am not surprised that Kahn brought in Grigg and pushed him into non football matters like the Riverside project.
As much as Symons has been criticized for not pulling the trigger in January I am actually pleased that we did not go back down a path of repeating earlier bad judgements in getting poor value in a panic.
None of us know how the system has worked under MAF or Khan between the owner, manager and the CEO. It may.be that the manager has persuaded the owner who has overruled the CEO's financial advice.
That said, however it happened, wages have shot up ahead of earnings and they will have almost certainly risen again in the next accounts which cover last season. Sustainability hasn't yet kicked in and we still have high wage earners on the books.
The interesting thing is that whilst this has all been going on, public statements were made to the effect that we had to live within our means and become self-sustaining.
There has clearly been a gap between the rhetoric and the reality...
Mind you Bolton have just confirmed they lost over 9 Million last year and their debts are up to 172.9 million.
Even in my wildest nightmares, I don't think Fulham is anywhere near that fiancial plight.
Quote from: Burt on April 01, 2015, 12:23:45 PM
The interesting thing is that whilst this has all been going on, public statements were made to the effect that we had to live within our means and become self-sustaining.
There has clearly been a gap between the rhetoric and the reality...
A problem is you may choose to move to sustainability but you may have players with high wages with contracts with 3 or 4 years still to run. It will take time for the high wage bill to run down.
And the finance department can't even get their financial statements submitted on time...
From the Companies House website:
QuoteAccounting Reference Date: 30/06
Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/06/2013 (GROUP)
Next Accounts Due: 31/03/2015 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 21/05/2014
Next Return Due: 18/06/2015
Quote from: YoungsBitter on April 01, 2015, 12:13:10 AM
As much as Symons has been criticized for not pulling the trigger in January I am actually pleased that we did not go back down a path of repeating earlier bad judgements in getting poor value in a panic.
My perception was that it was Khan who bore the brunt of criticism for the fact that we didn't go on a spending spree; those who already held him in low regard seemed more than happy to conclude that our lack of expenditure could have only one reason: Khan's poor chairmanship/lack of interest.
What MJG's research shows is that, from the moment we were relegated, Khan has been in a position whereby unpopular decisions have had to be made. How skilfully the situation has been handled, time will tell. (If we were to be promoted next season and the accounts for this season were to show us having operated within the rules of FFP, then frankly he'd be nothing short of a hero.)
Like you, however, I think the Club (whether it be Khan or Symons or both) made the right call: I think we were prepared to purchase a player-or-two who would be of use to us into next season and beyond, but when that list of select players proved unobtainable, we were not willing to invest transfer fees and wages for two-and-half-year contacts on players upon whom we would straightaway need to upgrade in the summer if we are to challenge for promotion.
Quote from: FurMan on April 02, 2015, 02:14:56 PM
And the finance department can't even get their financial statements submitted on time...
From the Companies House website:
QuoteAccounting Reference Date: 30/06
Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/06/2013 (GROUP)
Next Accounts Due: 31/03/2015 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 21/05/2014
Next Return Due: 18/06/2015
Without knowing what they are I will give you my guess at what the figures will be for 2013-14 against the season before which I had in the article and some for this season.
(http://i61.tinypic.com/a4ahkn.png)
Again, very well put together and a great read Mike.
The whole story that Mike has told is why I have repeatedly said that our top earners like Parker / Ruiz / McCormack / Amor and Hugo have to be worth the money we are paying them. I don't know exactely what they earn however I can guess its something between £30-50K a week. For me only Parker and McCormack have come anywhere near earning this money which is why we have to shift them out as soon as we can. I know people love Parker but I am not convinced he can't be replaced next season, after all he is going to a year older, unable to play all games and potentially start to get injured more often. McCormack has never played in the Premiership so whilst I would expect him (due to his transfer fee size) to be on top wages, he may not be on quite as much as the others.
Quote from: FulhamStu on April 02, 2015, 05:46:33 PM
Again, very well put together and a great read Mike.
The whole story that Mike has told is why I have repeatedly said that our top earners like Parker / Ruiz / McCormack / Amor and Hugo have to be worth the money we are paying them. I don't know exactely what they earn however I can guess its something between £30-50K a week. For me only Parker and McCormack have come anywhere near earning this money which is why we have to shift them out as soon as we can. I know people love Parker but I am not convinced he can't be replaced next season, after all he is going to a year older, unable to play all games and potentially start to get injured more often. McCormack has never played in the Premiership so whilst I would expect him (due to his transfer fee size) to be on top wages, he may not be on quite as much as the others.
.......and don't forget Stekelenberg! He was signed by joker Jol for very good wages, on a very long contract. Question is, who will take the likes of Amore and Stek off our hands?
Quote from: Scrumpy on April 02, 2015, 09:11:57 PM
Quote from: FulhamStu on April 02, 2015, 05:46:33 PM
Again, very well put together and a great read Mike.
The whole story that Mike has told is why I have repeatedly said that our top earners like Parker / Ruiz / McCormack / Amor and Hugo have to be worth the money we are paying them. I don't know exactely what they earn however I can guess its something between £30-50K a week. For me only Parker and McCormack have come anywhere near earning this money which is why we have to shift them out as soon as we can. I know people love Parker but I am not convinced he can't be replaced next season, after all he is going to a year older, unable to play all games and potentially start to get injured more often. McCormack has never played in the Premiership so whilst I would expect him (due to his transfer fee size) to be on top wages, he may not be on quite as much as the others.
.......and don't forget Stekelenberg! He was signed by joker Jol for very good wages, on a very long contract. Question is, who will take the likes of Amore and Stek off our hands?
I think the loans of Stek and Mitro have probably achieved this although I am not sure. The press are saying Southampton want Stek.
Quote from: MJG on March 30, 2015, 10:19:53 PM
I have written an article on Fulham's finances setting the picture for the accounts that are due to be released in next few days. Usually i would paste it on here but there are a number of graphics.
If you wish to comment or give any feedback please do so.
http://www.vivaelfulham.co.uk/articles/fulham-a-financial-look-at-what-went-wrong--7-587.html (http://www.vivaelfulham.co.uk/articles/fulham-a-financial-look-at-what-went-wrong--7-587.html)
Great stuff MJG!
Well done
