Justifiable Outrage

[Mickeyboro]

Apart from my health the other reason I don't go is because of ticket prices, but in saying that I have an acquaintance of mine who is a fanatical supporter was giving it hell about having to pay £100 to watch Fulham, yet a week later he happily paid out near £400 to watch Diana Ross.
Personally I wouldn't pay 40p to watch her, but that's just me.

She can no longer sing...and is sh1te at penalties!😁

[H4usuallysitting]

Tourist's as I've said before will see 2/4 game's in a week - they fly in & fly out again....

The other's (and they mainly work in the city, mayfair or canary wharf) will have season tickets (2 or 3 ticket's) for both chelsea & Fulham....

I have no idea what the answer is, but prem football is nothing more than a business - and the more successful that business, the more people will want to be associated with it...

[Allprocro]

It's a business, welcome to the light.

Khan has written off more personal debt into the club then I can even imagine into existence. To question his commitment to the club or fans is laughable. You all should be ashamed.

Nobody should be ashamed for feeling the way they do about prices rising so dramatically having loved Fulham for decades. Two things can be true at the same time about the Khans. I think you should reflect on why your response was to attack others in this instance

I mean if we are all just going to circle jerk to strawmen arguments I can show myself out.

Have fun.

[northamptonsteve]

Only get to a few games a season due to location, work and cost. Bought my wife and son down Saturday ( £75 train ), only tickets available in Riverside so that was £250, £10 for a hotdog and £7 a pint hurt, and a couple in the Lion before. Probably done £500 for 1 game against Luton! 3 pts helped garbage game mind lol.

[alfie]

Only get to a few games a season due to location, work and cost. Bought my wife and son down Saturday ( £75 train ), only tickets available in Riverside so that was £250, £10 for a hotdog and £7 a pint hurt, and a couple in the Lion before. Probably done £500 for 1 game against Luton! 3 pts helped garbage game mind lol.

£10 for hot dog, that's not the club though, that's the catering company.

[General]

Apart from my health the other reason I don't go is because of ticket prices, but in saying that I have an acquaintance of mine who is a fanatical supporter was giving it hell about having to pay £100 to watch Fulham, yet a week later he happily paid out near £400 to watch Diana Ross.
Personally I wouldn't pay 40p to watch her, but that's just me.

In fairness a big gig can be twice or three times the length of a football match If you include supporting acts, they're also a lot rarer.. so charge a bigger premium makes sense to a degree. I do still think the prices they charge are a ridiculous amount for big stadium gigs considering how shocking the view is for most punters. That seems to just be me though and a lot of people seem happy to pay a lot to sit in seats where the artists look like ants.

Diana Ross could also be rare to the point if there's emotional sentimentality ie a couple have one of her songs as their song, or it reminds someone of their parents or grandparents and has a bigger sentimental value.

Fulham vs Luton..  Well that's slightly niche.

[northamptonsteve]

Alfie, surely the prices they charge are agreed with the contract? Sell 10 x more dogs at £5 a go,there wasn't a queue!

[General]

Only get to a few games a season due to location, work and cost. Bought my wife and son down Saturday ( £75 train ), only tickets available in Riverside so that was £250, £10 for a hotdog and £7 a pint hurt, and a couple in the Lion before. Probably done £500 for 1 game against Luton! 3 pts helped garbage game mind lol.

£10 for hot dog, that's not the club though, that's the catering company.

Thats both for the hotdog. And the majority will go to the club, that's how those things work. Retailers always get the highest mark up. I'd be very surprised if a competitive commercial hot dog company for their product charged more than £2 per hot dog and bun.. and that's being generous, especially if you buy in bulk.

[General]

I love the way we are all so grovelling to the Khans

Does anyone in their right mind think they bought the club because they support FFC/ like the fans ?

It's all about business and returns, so please let's not kid ourselves

To be honest, so was MAF's motive for purchase - he would have asset stripped but he got in those funds from Sultan of Brunei and gradually changed his ideas after the Hamilton and Lonhro rows

In fairness, to me at least, whilst MAF was frustrating at the time, he had a clear limit in terms of funds he was willing to put into players and for a long time it felt very frustrating. We relied heavily on picking fringe players and hoping they'd come good.. either they were older in their careers of from random leagues, or players often found on the bench.

Pantsil came to us from west hams reserves, etuhu from Sunderland bench? Murphy wasn't getting game time at spurs, Davies was on the bench at Everton..  Duff had got relegated with Newcastle.. hangeland came from the Norwegian league and so did nevland if I remember correctly.

We either found the perfect formula, hired an inspired manager who utilised all his experience.

He rarely loaded the fans with costs and definitely not in the same way the khan's have done and to the extremes.

Yes things have changed somewhat but even compared to London clubs those prices are way different to ours.

[Twig]

It's a business, welcome to the light.

Khan has written off more personal debt into the club then I can even imagine into existence. To question his commitment to the club or fans is laughable. You all should be ashamed.

Well before you start insulting everyone you might want to get your facts right. If you care to check the accounts I think you may find that Shahid Khan has mostly converted debt into equity. Whilst that was a welcome move it is different to a debt write off.

[KJS]

I agree with the sentiments posted by the OP and subsequent replies regarding the almost gratuitous raising of prices for entry.

I hope the club management reads these threads

I am no activist, but simply hoping that voices on this forum are heard will probably get nowhere. Sending emails to the club as well as posting here is probably a futile gesture, too, but it has a better chance of getting some attention.

To be honest this forum is made up of only a very small number of fans so it will have no influence whatsoever, football is about money end of story so you pay up or stay away it's up to the individual🙄

[RaySmith]

I refer back to the last forum podcast, a very interesting discussion about this matter.

Someone made the point that in today's UK footballing society, the choice is in  being a Prem club - and all Prem  clubs are part of an elite, all paying massive wages and transfer fees, and with high, market driven - if enough fans don't buy the tickets the price will come down, though we are selling out at present - ticket prices, though probably a lot less the farther north you go, as is everything else - sustained in Fulham's case by the khans' money, as it was that MAF's money gained us this status of always being in or around the Prem;
  or going back to the old Fulham, bit of a joke to the other top London teams, with its decrepit ground, a bit shambolically run, which  was also friendly and  safe, compared to other clubs, and which many of us know and love, and with our own heroes and history;
   but looking as if the rest of the club's life was going to be in the lower divisions, after our 60's  glory years of the old First division, and the glamour of attracting stars when we were in Divsion 2,like, Moore and Mullery, who led us to our first FA Cup Final, and George Best and Rodney marsh.

The Khans money sustains up at this level, and they've built a new stand, and the prices are now very high, unaffordable for many, to fund the Prem wages and transfer fees, to get the players we need to stay in the Prem.

Of course, the khans are very successful businessmen, but Fulham isn't much of a business opportunity you might say, running at a loss, but they obviously aren't just  doing this for money, though they may expect to make money in the future, or at least be sustainable, but also their profile and American football interests, perhaps.

The Friends of Fulham podcaster   said fans have a choice - he, personally, had a choice - not to pay the very high prices, or boycott this modern Fulham FC, which is a lot less like the club we started off supporting.

The bloke said that he made the choice of supporting  Fulham as a Prem team, and liked the fact that it was in the Prem, because he could afford it, but understood that many couldn't afford it , or opposed it in principle, and would even prefer Fulham to be in a lower division, but more like the Fulham of old, and easily affordable.

Personally, even the cheapest home tickets are now beyond my pocket, to go regularly in any case, but I feel guilty about going to any games, as a married man, with a wife who isn't interested in football, and we are both retired with limited income.

One thing, couldn't the club have a range of very cheap tickets, for those on low income, say? as they do in Germany, where the clubs have to have a degree of fan ownership. The over 65 tickets at the moment are still extremely expensive for many, with little reduction.

[Rupert]

Ray has summed it up very nicely, and I honestly think this is something that goes back to when Chairman Mo proposed the new Dairy Crest site for a new stadium.

I am old Fulham (rapidly approaching very old Fulham) fifty five years at the Cottage, man and boy. When Dairy Crest was suggested I understood we had a choice. Abandon the Cottage and become a bigger club (say West Ham or even start to rival Chelsea size) and presumably become virtually permanent members of the top flight, since even relegation would be followed by a swift return to the top. Or, go back to the Cottage and accept our time in the Premier League was limited.

I, personally, would have been sad to see the Cottage go, but would have swallowed it in exchange for the greater security a larger ground would have supplied. It matched Mo's ambitions for the club, he would have made a mint out of selling the ground, a lot of 5hat would have been further invested, and who knows where we might have got to.

Might have, could have, did not. It is all in the past, and I am happy to support a club which is still a Premier League minnow with a limited shelf life.

Enter the Khans. Their solution to the small size of the ground is to maximise income by building a super stand with lots of income generating opportunities, when finished, and putting the prices up. Again, the choice. Do you want a more sustainable club in the top flight? The bigger stadium plan is gone, we are staying at the Cottage. So we put prices up. As many have said, it is pricing fans out of going. As I said in a previous post, if those fans are content to not buy top quality players and face a relegation struggle every season, with no real chance of a swift return if we go down, then their stance is perfectly reasonable. However, if they do want top players and do want a sustained presence amongst the elite, then where else is the money going to come from?

I will emphasise, I am not taking the moral high ground, that you can not demand top players and low admission prices. I am genuinely interested to know how those who see this as an outrage would fund our survival, or would they gladly accept relegation and a difficult few seasons rebuilding for a shortish return? I do not see lack of ambition as a problem, but as our current government has amply demonstrated, you can not deliver on ambitious projects without properly funding them. So those who want low prices and high performance may need to offer alternative strategies.

[Penfold]

Ray has summed it up very nicely, and I honestly think this is something that goes back to when Chairman Mo proposed the new Dairy Crest site for a new stadium.

I am old Fulham (rapidly approaching very old Fulham) fifty five years at the Cottage, man and boy. When Dairy Crest was suggested I understood we had a choice. Abandon the Cottage and become a bigger club (say West Ham or even start to rival Chelsea size) and presumably become virtually permanent members of the top flight, since even relegation would be followed by a swift return to the top. Or, go back to the Cottage and accept our time in the Premier League was limited.

I, personally, would have been sad to see the Cottage go, but would have swallowed it in exchange for the greater security a larger ground would have supplied. It matched Mo's ambitions for the club, he would have made a mint out of selling the ground, a lot of 5hat would have been further invested, and who knows where we might have got to.

Might have, could have, did not. It is all in the past, and I am happy to support a club which is still a Premier League minnow with a limited shelf life.

Enter the Khans. Their solution to the small size of the ground is to maximise income by building a super stand with lots of income generating opportunities, when finished, and putting the prices up. Again, the choice. Do you want a more sustainable club in the top flight? The bigger stadium plan is gone, we are staying at the Cottage. So we put prices up. As many have said, it is pricing fans out of going. As I said in a previous post, if those fans are content to not buy top quality players and face a relegation struggle every season, with no real chance of a swift return if we go down, then their stance is perfectly reasonable. However, if they do want top players and do want a sustained presence amongst the elite, then where else is the money going to come from?

I will emphasise, I am not taking the moral high ground, that you can not demand top players and low admission prices. I am genuinely interested to know how those who see this as an outrage would fund our survival, or would they gladly accept relegation and a difficult few seasons rebuilding for a shortish return? I do not see lack of ambition as a problem, but as our current government has amply demonstrated, you can not deliver on ambitious projects without properly funding them. So those who want low prices and high performance may need to offer alternative strategies.

I'm amazed how many people think higher prices means better players. Have a look at the last published accounts for a premier league season where a full stadium was allowed (2018/19) and look at what % of turnover ticket revenue was.

To sign a significant top player by increasing ticket revenue would mean needing everyone to pay over £1000 for a season ticket.

[Rupert]

I'm amazed how many people think higher prices means better players. Have a look at the last published accounts for a premier league season where a full stadium was allowed (2018/19) and look at what % of turnover ticket revenue was.

To sign a significant top player by increasing ticket revenue would mean needing everyone to pay over £1000 for a season ticket.

Financial Fair Play uses gate income amongst other factors to decide how much less we can spend than the big boys. If you want to widen that gap, then by all means go for lower gate prices. And if the gap is wider, we can afford to spend less on players. Hence my likening lower admission prices to less spending power, which is likely to mean we go for bargain prices rather than spending the top dollars some seem to think we should be splashing out to demonstrate our ambition.

[bog]

Apart from my health the other reason I don't go is because of ticket prices, but in saying that I have an acquaintance of mine who is a fanatical supporter was giving it hell about having to pay £100 to watch Fulham, yet a week later he happily paid out near £400 to watch Diana Ross.
Personally I wouldn't pay 40p to watch her, but that's just me.

She can no longer sing...and is sh1te at penalties!😁

Did she give that Serbian bloke lessons on taking them?   

[Penfold]

I'm amazed how many people think higher prices means better players. Have a look at the last published accounts for a premier league season where a full stadium was allowed (2018/19) and look at what % of turnover ticket revenue was.

To sign a significant top player by increasing ticket revenue would mean needing everyone to pay over £1000 for a season ticket.

Financial Fair Play uses gate income amongst other factors to decide how much less we can spend than the big boys. If you want to widen that gap, then by all means go for lower gate prices. And if the gap is wider, we can afford to spend less on players. Hence my likening lower admission prices to less spending power, which is likely to mean we go for bargain prices rather than spending the top dollars some seem to think we should be splashing out to demonstrate our ambition.

If that is the case with FFP it's not fair play it's just totally loaded in favour of the clubs with the biggest support.

[Rupert]

If that is the case with FFP it's not fair play it's just totally loaded in favour of the clubs with the biggest support.

Unfortunately that is exactly the point of FFP. They do not want Fulham or Brighton or, God forbid, Brentford winning the league. The occasional one off, Leicester or Blackburn, they can live with, but it has to be the BIG clubs winning to keep the SKY cash flowing in. Top of the Table clash Man C v Arsenal will rake in the TV subscriptions. Top of the Table Fulham v Burnley would not.

[perry geyton]

It's the world we now live in Im afraid, definitely not just a Fulham thing
Take a look around you, things are only gonna get weirder

[General]

Ray has summed it up very nicely, and I honestly think this is something that goes back to when Chairman Mo proposed the new Dairy Crest site for a new stadium.

I am old Fulham (rapidly approaching very old Fulham) fifty five years at the Cottage, man and boy. When Dairy Crest was suggested I understood we had a choice. Abandon the Cottage and become a bigger club (say West Ham or even start to rival Chelsea size) and presumably become virtually permanent members of the top flight, since even relegation would be followed by a swift return to the top. Or, go back to the Cottage and accept our time in the Premier League was limited.

I, personally, would have been sad to see the Cottage go, but would have swallowed it in exchange for the greater security a larger ground would have supplied. It matched Mo's ambitions for the club, he would have made a mint out of selling the ground, a lot of 5hat would have been further invested, and who knows where we might have got to.

Might have, could have, did not. It is all in the past, and I am happy to support a club which is still a Premier League minnow with a limited shelf life.

Enter the Khans. Their solution to the small size of the ground is to maximise income by building a super stand with lots of income generating opportunities, when finished, and putting the prices up. Again, the choice. Do you want a more sustainable club in the top flight? The bigger stadium plan is gone, we are staying at the Cottage. So we put prices up. As many have said, it is pricing fans out of going. As I said in a previous post, if those fans are content to not buy top quality players and face a relegation struggle every season, with no real chance of a swift return if we go down, then their stance is perfectly reasonable. However, if they do want top players and do want a sustained presence amongst the elite, then where else is the money going to come from?

I will emphasise, I am not taking the moral high ground, that you can not demand top players and low admission prices. I am genuinely interested to know how those who see this as an outrage would fund our survival, or would they gladly accept relegation and a difficult few seasons rebuilding for a shortish return? I do not see lack of ambition as a problem, but as our current government has amply demonstrated, you can not deliver on ambitious projects without properly funding them. So those who want low prices and high performance may need to offer alternative strategies.

Where was the dairy crest site? That option passed me by at the time.

I think re the spend and performance I'd simply say that it's about spending more wisely and intelligently then expensively.

Brighton and Brentford are proof it can be done even today and we've even seen it in the season we came 7th, achieved multiple top ten finishes and got to the europa league final.

Leadership, team spirit, working hard for one another and having a clear purpose everyone's bought into counts for so much more in these situations, they always have.

Tech should be seen, and finance, as an enabler, but many a wealthy person have defaulted to making dim decisions because they've got wealth instead of keeping a keen eye to things and maintaining that intellectual interest and due diligence.

There are enough players valued at reasonable prices at the top clubs and in the top European league's that you can still succeed without breaking the bank.

Chelsea have thrown 2billion into their team and are below us..

Build a proper vision and that's as eye catching as most money. Even Ronaldo the 2nd claimed he went to Saudi with an intention to build a legacy and build out the league there, money almost definitely played a part, but the recent exodus would suggest it was valid and has worked.