A blast from the past - Harry Kewell, linked to Fulham

Yes, valjing, we did pay big money for certain players. Van der Saar was a success, but do you think it was money well spent on Marlet or AJ? In both of those cases we were left paying top wages for someone who many fans didn't feel warranted it. Personally I've felt that AJ has played well for us, but without getting the number of goals we anticipated. I know you take a different view. My point is that it isn't sustainable for us to compete with the big teams for the big name players. The best value for money is for us to find the right unsung players and get them before the grow into big stars.

 

The Captain is right, we just can't compete. I mean, who would you have expected us to sign, valjing, roscafre?

 

i agree with Captain, the only problem i have is when we do sign the unsung players they play for us for a few seasons then all the speculations starts about them being too good for us and blah da blah, atleast we get very good money for them then it starts the circle again. i dunno why but one player has just jumped into my head lol facundo sava hahaha

 

These figures go back to the 08/09 season (most recent I could find in a limited search online), but they illustrate the point. These figures are from http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2010/08/theres-only-one-debt-in-fulham.html which I posted a while ago.

Man Utd: Match day revenue: 109m (that's all the matchdays per season, I think, not per game!); broadcasting revenue: 100m; Commercial revenue: 70m

Spurs: Match day revenue: 40m; broadcasting rev: 45m; Commercial rev: 29m

Villa: matchday: 22m; broadcasting: 50m; Commercial: 12m

Everton: matchday: 22m; broadcasting: 49m; Commercial: 9m

Fulham: matchday: 11m; broadcasting: 43; Commercial: 12m

I haven't included all clubs - follow the link for more info - but the ones listed above are, I think, instructive. We are dwarfed by Man Utd, etc (but that's predictable), and we are even lagging behind the likes of Villa and Everton. Financially, we're on a par with the Blackburns and Boltons. It's interesting to note that we seem to be punching above our weight on commercial income - 3m per year better than the far more illustrious Everton - which is probably due to Al Fayed's business savvy (and remember, this was before the lucrative cash cow of exploiting the memory of Michael Jackson). For more comparisons of Premier League finances, see http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ebt-league-how-much-do-clubs-owe-1912244.html which helps put us in context against some of the other teams in the Premier League.

If we were to act on the granted planning permission to increase capacity of the Cottage by 3000, it might make a small difference to matchday income (if we can fill those seats on a regular basis). Beyond that, unless we move to a bigger ground - which I for one would be dead against - we can't realistically expect to compete as anything other than a solid mid-table premier league team who punches above its weight for some of the time and stays out of trouble (hopefully) the rest.

Thinking about the bigger signings of the past, with the exception of AJ they were all in a time when Al Fayed was planning on moving to a bigger stadium and turning us into 'the Manchester United of the South' (which is funny, because their fan base means that Manchester United are the Manchester United of the South). Van der Saar bought into the ambition which was subsequently scaled back when Al Fayed realised the fans opposition to leaving the Cottage. Fair play to him, many others would have rode roughshod over that opinion, but he didn't. I'm happy as we are and don't want to see us play russian roulette with the club's future by over-reaching financially.