Author Topic: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT  (Read 2099 times)

Offline Woolly Mammoth

  • Cliffy Dean
  • ****
  • Posts: 28623
  • Not one step back.
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2020, 08:25:50 AM »
You must remember that the serpent was in the garden before Adam & Eve.

Offline Dr Quinzel

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 559
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #21 on: October 03, 2020, 09:19:30 AM »
If the Khans leave, then QPR and Brentford will end up bigger clubs than us.

Hahahahahahah.

1. Under the Khan's, Brentford are making progress to be so anyway. We all know it's a matter of time as they make their slow and steady ascent, whilst we are 'killing' to be a 'yo-yo club'.
2. What proof do you have that any other would be much worse, and not of the same ilk as Brentford's?

Irrational nonsense from the 'Rational' one.

But as ever, you know best.

Offline john dempsey

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 550
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2020, 09:31:53 AM »
All of the khans time in charge and before they took over
macintosh has been CEO. and the disaster that is parker has been
involved in one capacity or another for the majority of  their tenure .
So indeed the serpents were in the garden before the khans.


Offline fulhamben

  • Moritz Volz
  • ***
  • Posts: 17606
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2020, 09:36:35 AM »
All of the khans time in charge and before they took over
macintosh has been CEO. and the disaster that is parker has been
involved in one capacity or another for the majority of  their tenure .
So indeed the serpents were in the garden before the khans.
when jol signed parker as our anchor, i didnt think he meant that he would drag our club down for a decade

Offline Twig

  • Mr Fayed
  • **
  • Posts: 10729
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2020, 09:45:21 AM »
If the Khans leave, then QPR and Brentford will end up bigger clubs than us.

Frankly I couldn’t care less about the successes and setbacks of those two clubs, or any others. I just want success for my club.

Anyhow your assertion is nonsense, one or both may or may not become bigger than us but you have no basis to state this as a fact.

Offline Woolly Mammoth

  • Cliffy Dean
  • ****
  • Posts: 28623
  • Not one step back.
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #25 on: October 03, 2020, 10:02:10 AM »
If the Khans leave, then QPR and Brentford will end up bigger clubs than us.

On what basis or evidence causes you to make an irrational statement like that, and who cares whether the Bees or the Hoops are bigger, smaller or the same size. It is what happens to Fulham FC is the concern.


Offline toshes mate

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 6645
  • Vitam Impendere Vero
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #26 on: October 03, 2020, 10:40:17 AM »
If the Khans leave, then QPR and Brentford will end up bigger clubs than us.
I am always curious about how rational people can clearly see the future given any twist in the present.  I am especially curious about the phrase 'end up' since that implies you know when a line will be drawn under life as we know it.  Please do enlighten me.

Offline ALG01

  • MAESTRO
  • **
  • Posts: 2717
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #27 on: October 03, 2020, 10:44:57 AM »
I have nothing but praise for Shad Khan. he has supported the club financially for what is now approaching a decade (seems incredible).  His infrastructure investments in our training facilities and our ground will still be benefitting us long after he has moved on.  He also seems to be a genuinely decent man.

Neither do I have anything against Tony Khan on a personal level. he may or may not be brash or arrogant, I've never met him.  However his tweets and other communications are naive at best, often ill considered and occasionally downright destructive, he has a lot to learn to be a successful senior manager.  Even worse he is hopelessly ill qualified for the technical side of his job and is only in it as a result of nepotism which I personally have always detested in any walk of life.

I would never turn on them as people but I have long ago turned on TK as a DoF and if his father refuses to move him then maybe, just maybe I would begin to be critical of him as a Chairman.

Shad Khan took over in July 2013, 7 years ago. that is 30% less than a decade and 42% more years needed to make a decade. so not nearly a decade. It seems incredible our team has gone so far backwards in that time. I cannot recall being so unemotional about the club. I used to think we could win every game, even when we were in the lower leagues playing a big team in the cup. Now I have no faith we will even compete, let alone win, you are right it seems incredible how that has happened.

As far as TK is concened he is a spectacular failure as a manager and is incapable of learning making the same mistakes over and over. If he was any good he would step aside.

The Khan's are to be applauded for the investment but if the teamis unsuccesful, and it is, then in the long run the investment will be wasted. there are plenty of team in the lower leagues with shiny new stadiums and massive debts. They may be nice people but they have us pointed in the wrong direction. The nepotism you say is wrong ois the problem and needs to be dealt with or it wll really be a long road back this time.

they have taken the fun out of it.

Serious question then.

Why did MaF sell, and why to the Khans?

I have read so many times recently how were this great club until the Khans bought us. If we were such a catch, then why did MaF sell?

MAF sold because he was getting old and it was clear was not quite the man he once was. He sold a number of his assets and is far less of a public figure now.

Why did he sell to them? Who knows? Not me.

Offline Logicalman

  • Global Moderator
  • Gentleman Jim
  • *
  • Posts: 5016
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #28 on: October 03, 2020, 12:31:11 PM »
Serious question then.

Why did MaF sell, and why to the Khans?

I have read so many times recently how were this great club until the Khans bought us. If we were such a catch, then why did MaF sell?

No one except MAF himself can answer that question but one assumes after 16 years and going from a poor third tier team to European Cup finalists, he lost interest and/or thought he'd taken us as far as he could (at least, without throwing a lot more money at the club)

In Shahid Khan, you had someone who was prepared to throw several hundred million in new cash at the club and to continue the development of the Riverside Stand. The perfect successor.

What no one knew is that money would be put in the hands of an absolute novice and squandered.


MAF sold because he was getting old and it was clear was not quite the man he once was. He sold a number of his assets and is far less of a public figure now.

Why did he sell to them? Who knows? Not me.

This is purely a personal opinion, based on what  have read, heard or been told directly.

I was interested in others' opinions on this because I was led to believe that MaF sold because he basically couldn't afford to keep pumping monies in to keep us a Prem going concern.
That said then, it indicates that we were not self-generating enough income to keep our heads above water. When MaF 'forgave' our debt to him (some 170M wasn't I thought?), it was somewhat of a godsend for us, though I feel it was supposed to have been recouped upon a subsequent sale.

The main issue is that there were very few suiters to buy us. Whereby we might have needed the likes of the Citeh owners, or similar, the Khans stepped in. SK has the funds, and he has a history of taking a pro team in the declining stage and pulling them up, plus the incentive to internationalize the Jaguars franchise with regular matches in London. He had that latter rug pulled out from below him tbh, by Levy & co.

I'm unsure whether SK fully appreciated how the English footie leagues and the NFL structures differ and affect the fortunes of the teams involved. NFL have that safety net, footie doesn't.

I feel our biggest worry may not be relegation this season, it's whether SK will continue his patronage in the long run. Yes, TK has not been a success in his role in the case of FFC, so there's nobody to point the finger at outside of the family, but that may not play into the decision. I'm unsure where we would end up if SK does walk away. The grass may not be as greener as we hope.


Offline toshes mate

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 6645
  • Vitam Impendere Vero
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #29 on: October 03, 2020, 12:52:34 PM »
This is purely a personal opinion, based on what  have read, heard or been told directly.

I was interested in others' opinions on this because I was led to believe that MaF sold because he basically couldn't afford to keep pumping monies in to keep us a Prem going concern.
That said then, it indicates that we were not self-generating enough income to keep our heads above water. When MaF 'forgave' our debt to him (some 170M wasn't I thought?), it was somewhat of a godsend for us, though I feel it was supposed to have been recouped upon a subsequent sale.

The main issue is that there were very few suiters to buy us. Whereby we might have needed the likes of the Citeh owners, or similar, the Khans stepped in. SK has the funds, and he has a history of taking a pro team in the declining stage and pulling them up, plus the incentive to internationalize the Jaguars franchise with regular matches in London. He had that latter rug pulled out from below him tbh, by Levy & co.

I'm unsure whether SK fully appreciated how the English footie leagues and the NFL structures differ and affect the fortunes of the teams involved. NFL have that safety net, footie doesn't.

I feel our biggest worry may not be relegation this season, it's whether SK will continue his patronage in the long run. Yes, TK has not been a success in his role in the case of FFC, so there's nobody to point the finger at outside of the family, but that may not play into the decision. I'm unsure where we would end up if SK does walk away. The grass may not be as greener as we hope.
 

I do believe there may have been a semblance of intuitive business cleverness in Shahid Khan's original thoughts (echoing your thinking about American Football in the UK, etc) and I think to his credit that is what may have swung MAF's POV.  Fulham could become much more sustainable with a wider base of operation (which may also have featured in the purchase of the ex-BBC site) and if Craven Cottage could somehow be transformed into a ground capable of multi-sport it makes even more sense. 

MAF had a lot of personal reasons to want to move away from the UK, and he must have thought long and hard how he would end his love affair with FFC which begun when his own personal status was, in his reasonable view, on the up.   And I do believe he loved the Club. That may lead us to conclude that Shahid Khan's interest is also on the wane and would further diminish if TK were removed from involvement.  But that would only ring wholly true if Shahid Khan's heart was not really ever wholly in FFC as an entity per se, and, if so, it leaves us still on very shaky ground regardless of his son.

What would it take to get SK's aspirations back wholly centred around FFC if they ever were wholly focused upon us and not as part of a combination of other ideas?  Who, if anyone, advises Shahid Khan, and was there ever a Plan B?

Offline Penfold

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 855
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #30 on: October 03, 2020, 01:03:13 PM »
Al Fayed had sold Harrods a little while before selling Fulham. Depending on what you believe, he's currently 87 or 91. Whichever it was, he was getting on and had decided to retire.

I recall him bringing one of his sons onto the board, but the story I heard was that he had no real ability for running a football club.

Debt converted to equity was somewhere in the region of £230m. He recouped anywhere between £150m - £200m per the media. However much it was, it was regarded as way above what football finance people valued Fulham at.

Offline Tabby

  • The Bard/Corked Hat
  • *
  • Posts: 3176
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #31 on: October 03, 2020, 01:07:51 PM »
Al Fayed had sold Harrods a little while before selling Fulham. Depending on what you believe, he's currently 87 or 91. Whichever it was, he was getting on and had decided to retire.

I recall him bringing one of his sons onto the board, but the story I heard was that he had no real ability for running a football club.

Debt converted to equity was somewhere in the region of £230m. He recouped anywhere between £150m - £200m per the media. However much it was, it was regarded as way above what football finance people valued Fulham at.

I remember he tried to make one of his sons do what TK is doing basically, but I guess he wasn't interested.

My stance on the Khans is the same as it has been for a long time. They're not actively malicious and their wealth isn't stained with blood. At worst they're incompetent, so I'm fine with them.


Statto

  • Guest
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #32 on: October 03, 2020, 01:17:18 PM »
This is purely a personal opinion, based on what  have read, heard or been told directly.

I was interested in others' opinions on this because I was led to believe that MaF sold because he basically couldn't afford to keep pumping monies in to keep us a Prem going concern.
That said then, it indicates that we were not self-generating enough income to keep our heads above water. When MaF 'forgave' our debt to him (some 170M wasn't I thought?), it was somewhat of a godsend for us, though I feel it was supposed to have been recouped upon a subsequent sale.

The main issue is that there were very few suiters to buy us. Whereby we might have needed the likes of the Citeh owners, or similar, the Khans stepped in. SK has the funds, and he has a history of taking a pro team in the declining stage and pulling them up, plus the incentive to internationalize the Jaguars franchise with regular matches in London. He had that latter rug pulled out from below him tbh, by Levy & co.

I'm unsure whether SK fully appreciated how the English footie leagues and the NFL structures differ and affect the fortunes of the teams involved. NFL have that safety net, footie doesn't.

I feel our biggest worry may not be relegation this season, it's whether SK will continue his patronage in the long run. Yes, TK has not been a success in his role in the case of FFC, so there's nobody to point the finger at outside of the family, but that may not play into the decision. I'm unsure where we would end up if SK does walk away. The grass may not be as greener as we hope.

I'm inclined to agree with you about MAF. Although I do think it was about lacking the energy to continue running the club, not just the money.

But these days, PL clubs' TV revenue (£100m+ per season) and other income streams greatly exceed the losses the owner is permitted to underwrite under FFP (£35m).

So if the owner is wealthy enough to throw in that extra £35m each year, that's a bonus, but really it's far more important that they manage the club's own revenue efficiently.

MAF was shrewd enough to keep us in the PL for three years after 2010 not only without spending anymore of his own money, but actually clawing some back after the Dempsey/Dembele sales.

We really just needed someone with the nous and commitment to run the club properly. Even a small club like Fulham, as long as relegation is avoided, generates huge revenues through the TV money. Had we been in the PL for the entirety of SK's tenure, we'd have generated income of about £1 billion from 2013 up to now. We just needed someone able to recycle that efficiently.

Yes, it was a bonus that SK had the money to top up our accounts with the relatively modest extra amount permitted by FFP, and yes it was a bonus that he was prepared to develop the ground, but IMO this has been more than offset by mismanagement of the club's own revenue leading to two (well let's be honest, three) relegations.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2020, 01:20:18 PM by Statto »

Offline ALG01

  • MAESTRO
  • **
  • Posts: 2717
Re: We Tolerate Tony because his family Spend money BUT
« Reply #33 on: October 03, 2020, 01:17:59 PM »
Serious question then.

Why did MaF sell, and why to the Khans?

I have read so many times recently how were this great club until the Khans bought us. If we were such a catch, then why did MaF sell?

It is a personal opinion based on using my eyes ears and brain.
I don"t know why he sold to them.
If theycwalk away it wcould be very bad.
No one except MAF himself can answer that question but one assumes after 16 years and going from a poor third tier team to European Cup finalists, he lost interest and/or thought he'd taken us as far as he could (at least, without throwing a lot more money at the club)

In Shahid Khan, you had someone who was prepared to throw several hundred million in new cash at the club and to continue the development of the Riverside Stand. The perfect successor.

What no one knew is that money would be put in the hands of an absolute novice and squandered.


MAF sold because he was getting old and it was clear was not quite the man he once was. He sold a number of his assets and is far less of a public figure now.

Why did he sell to them? Who knows? Not me.

This is purely a personal opinion, based on what  have read, heard or been told directly.

I was interested in others' opinions on this because I was led to believe that MaF sold because he basically couldn't afford to keep pumping monies in to keep us a Prem going concern.
That said then, it indicates that we were not self-generating enough income to keep our heads above water. When MaF 'forgave' our debt to him (some 170M wasn't I thought?), it was somewhat of a godsend for us, though I feel it was supposed to have been recouped upon a subsequent sale.

The main issue is that there were very few suiters to buy us. Whereby we might have needed the likes of the Citeh owners, or similar, the Khans stepped in. SK has the funds, and he has a history of taking a pro team in the declining stage and pulling them up, plus the incentive to internationalize the Jaguars franchise with regular matches in London. He had that latter rug pulled out from below him tbh, by Levy & co.

I'm unsure whether SK fully appreciated how the English footie leagues and the NFL structures differ and affect the fortunes of the teams involved. NFL have that safety net, footie doesn't.

I feel our biggest worry may not be relegation this season, it's whether SK will continue his patronage in the long run. Yes, TK has not been a success in his role in the case of FFC, so there's nobody to point the finger at outside of the family, but that may not play into the decision. I'm unsure where we would end up if SK does walk away. The grass may not be as greener as we hope.