Fulham boss fearful club could end up like QPR if he overspends in transfer market 16:52, 28 April 2015 By Paul Warburton Whites boss admits he is restricted by Fair Play rules please log in to view this image Fulham manager Kit Symons Fulham boss Kit Symons would love to spend the club’s £40million parachute money in a bid to build a winning squad for next season. However, the Whites boss admits he is hamstrung by Financial Fair Play rules, which in essence prohibits clubs forking out more than they earn. In the last published accounts for 2013, Fulham made a £1m loss from a £73m turnover of which £67m was player wages. Symons and Whites are fearful penalties that might hit QPR should the neighbours get relegated will be their lot too if they overspend, despite the deep pockets of billionaire owner Shahid Khan. penalties that might hit QPR should the neighbours get relegated will be their lot too if they overspend, despite the deep pockets of billionaire owner Shahid Khan. please log in to view this image Budget: Fulham owner Shahid Khan (C) The Fulham manager said: “Financial fair play will play a part. “There was money available in January, the chairman has been very supportive and I spoke to him last week, but we extensively used the loan market; and I’m glad we did that. “Injuries and suspensions meant we were light. But I didn’t want to spend money now that kept us up but didn’t work out longer term. “I looked at options and they weren’t available; it was an educated gamble that paid off, but I predict a busy time in the summer. “Because of financial fair play we’d have to work within a budget, and there will be quite a few comings and goings.” please log in to view this image Repeat?: £11m Ross McCormack (C) may not be a one off Ross McCormack’s £11m acquisition last summer drew gasps and criticism aplenty, but Symons admits he is ready to spend the same again on one player if needs be. He added: “I'm not ruling out spending that type of money, but it would have to be really good value for the football club.” Fulham round off their season at Norwich on Saturday with an outside chance of 16th place if they dent Canary hopes of returning to the Premier League at the first attempt. Fulham won a close home game 1-0 in October at the Cottage (see gallery). The Whites were only one point behind Norwich when both took the 2013-14 plunge, but a bad start with only one point from seven games this season did for any Fulham hope they would bounce back like the East Anglia club.
Well when the scandal of the clubs accounts came out most on here weren't worried by what TF has done Looking forward to those posters catching on and the debates on here afterwards If we go down then it will just a matter of how far
So, to increase our turnover, why don't the Mittals purchase squillions of club shirts to distribute throughout India and Tonz do the same for Asia, thus increasing our turnover in the first instance. This would allow us to spend more on players. Secondly, we may have gained many more supporters, more publicity from giving away so many shirts. Look at it this way, if we wanted to spend 20 million for the team budget but Fair Play Rules only allowed us to spend 10 million, our directors each purchase enough shirts to increase our restricted budget. It's all about marketing, you must spend / invest to increase our fan base / turnover. We can't rely on our gate to bring in enough coin. Sounds crazy ........................ there is much to gain. If we don't spend, we ain't getting back up and we may even go down again.
I think the free shirt giveaway should start in new Zealand and work its way back towards London 2xl for me medium for the young fella
Something doesn't quite add up in the Fulham accounts...... Turnover 73m - wages 67m = surplus 6m before overheads and they made a loss of 1m, so overheads were 7m, that seems rather cheap when from memory our overhead expenditure in the last accounts was in the region of 20m......
Following on from what Aussie suggested. It's simple, sell 100 season tickets at one million each. There must be 100 people who would pay, then we wouldn't have to be fair anymore.
Yes, I thought exactly the same. Strange paradox of saying they will spend within a budget but would pay £11m for a player again as well.
Because the shirts are too ****ing expensive. ... and secondly because we'd probably get done for fruad?
please log in to view this image I thought Saddam Hussein was dead, he grew his hair and bought Fulham... please log in to view this image
We will get the chance within the next few months to let Kit Symons know personally what we think of him and his comments. There might be a few expletives used.
He doesn't. The article's writer Paul Warburton makes the tenuous connection. It fails to mention that Fulham spent more money on a player than 'big spending' QPR did though. ''Ross McCormack’s £11m acquisition last summer drew gasps and criticism aplenty, but Symons admits he is ready to spend the same again on one player if needs be.''
