McDermott via TalkSport

[comeonyouroyals]

Stupid thing to say. I'm certain that if McDermott was pressed on this he'd change tack and call it a success of sorts but not a success outright.

In fact, he takes the fans for mugs if he thinks we'd be happy to hear that not going up but selling players to the premier league is good enough for us.

If you can name me a team that is the last 4-5years has sold as many players as us for such high value and not revinsted a serious amount back into the playing staff then I will be suprised, the only team I can think off is Arsenal.

[Wycombe Royal]

Stupid thing to say. I'm certain that if McDermott was pressed on this he'd change tack and call it a success of sorts but not a success outright.

In fact, he takes the fans for mugs if he thinks we'd be happy to hear that not going up but selling players to the premier league is good enough for us.

If you can name me a team that is the last 4-5years has sold as many players as us for such high value and not revinsted a serious amount back into the playing staff then I will be suprised, the only team I can think off is Arsenal.

Watford

[comeonyouroyals]

Stupid thing to say. I'm certain that if McDermott was pressed on this he'd change tack and call it a success of sorts but not a success outright.

In fact, he takes the fans for mugs if he thinks we'd be happy to hear that not going up but selling players to the premier league is good enough for us.

If you can name me a team that is the last 4-5years has sold as many players as us for such high value and not revinsted a serious amount back into the playing staff then I will be suprised, the only team I can think off is Arsenal.

Watford

Yeah because of severe financial problems, the type of problems that us as a well run club don't have. I understand we have to sell players or we could go the same way as teams like pompey etc, but what I can understand the clubs belief that we can push year in year out with out some serious investment.

[Wycombe Royal]

If you can name me a team that is the last 4-5years has sold as many players as us for such high value and not revinsted a serious amount back into the playing staff then I will be suprised, the only team I can think off is Arsenal.

Watford

Yeah because of severe financial problems, the type of problems that us as a well run club don't have. I understand we have to sell players or we could go the same way as teams like pompey etc, but what I can understand the clubs belief that we can push year in year out with out some serious investment.

The reason for doing it is irrelevant. You asked for club that had sold players for a lot of money without reinvesting. Then you move the goalposts.

We don't get to see the cash flow of the club but I would guess that it would show that despite these players being sold we still aren't cash rich and need this money to keep paying the bills. Seeing a profit on the accounts at the end of the season is a lot different from the actual cash position.

Business can make a profit and still go under, but it is difficult for non-accountants to understand that because all they read about are profits and losses.....

[brendywendy]

we keep them for decent amounts of time, sig aside(but he was super special)and ensure we get the maximum money for most(unless we want to get shot of them) and thats pretty much any club like ours, without some rich idiot willing to throw money away in charge can hope for.
even if there was a rich backer id have said that most of the big money bids would have to be accepted since the players themselves want to move(mills aside- since if we had a rich owner hed have been payed as much as leicester wanted to pay him, and there probably wouldnt have been a percieved ambition deficit) since no proffesional footballer worthhis salt would say Reading was the pinnacle of his aspirations

[comeonyouroyals]

Umm did we keep Long for a decent amount of time? No the first transfer window after he got good he was gone.

[melonhead]

Umm did we keep Long for a decent amount of time? No the first transfer window after he got good he was gone.

ummm, hes been decent for a few years imo,shown by the fact that the season he got given starts consistently he scored consistently
and he just had a bad couple of months pre xmas, and even then only goalscoring wise, the rest of his game was top notch.
frankly only morons couldnt see that.

the point though is that once bigger better teams come in for anyone, youll have a hard job keeping them, and all you can really do is maximise the money you get, which we did.

[rhroyal]

Torn on these comments. No club should have the ambition of selling their players on to bigger clubs, which is what McD's comments could imply.

At the same time, no club can realistically expect to keep players when a bigger club comes calling and a decent bid is made. These aren't numbers on a Football Manager screen; it's players' careers we're considering here and keeping them can be counter productive if they've decided that they want "bigger" things. Shorey and SHunt perfect examples. Even Man City and Man Utd have struggled with this in recent years.

I think I just about interpret these comments positively. What McD could be trying to say is "We want to produce and develop lots of quality players, to get them into a position where they're too good for the Championship." If they're too good for the Championship, there are only really 2 solutions. Either get to the Premier League with them, or refer to the scenario painted above.

Obviously reaching the Premiership is the best solution out of the 2, but to be consistently producing Premiership players wouldn't be a bad scenario either. Not least because it would probably result in us challenging for promotion most seasons.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

We don't get to see the cash flow of the club but I would guess that it would show that despite these players being sold we still aren't cash rich and need this money to keep paying the bills. Seeing a profit on the accounts at the end of the season is a lot different from the actual cash position. .

The only thing I'd question is if the £4 million deficit is a yearly thing, then why?

The average wage bill in this division is supposed to be £9-10 million or so. I can't believe we can be paying £4 million more than that, and if we are, there's something badly wrong with our wage structure. £14 million is 30 players averaging almost £9500 a week.

[Wycombe Royal]

We don't get to see the cash flow of the club but I would guess that it would show that despite these players being sold we still aren't cash rich and need this money to keep paying the bills. Seeing a profit on the accounts at the end of the season is a lot different from the actual cash position. .

The only thing I'd question is if the £4 million deficit is a yearly thing, then why?

The average wage bill in this division is supposed to be £9-10 million or so. I can't believe we can be paying £4 million more than that, and if we are, there's something badly wrong with our wage structure. £14 million is 30 players averaging almost £9500 a week.

Do we only employ players then? Also measuring us against the average is pretty irrelevant as every club has different levels of overheads, different revenue streams, etc.

[If you still hate Futcher]

I'm amazed the division average is that low and could easily believe our average player wage to be around £10k, but as WR points out it's not just player wages that make up the outgoings

[papereyes]

The only thing I'd question is if the £4 million deficit is a yearly thing, then why?

That's what deficits are, aren't they?

deficit - annual loss
debt - total accumulated loss

if we're running at a deficit of several million, then every year we need to find an additional several million to break even.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

The only thing I'd question is if the £4 million deficit is a yearly thing, then why?

That's what deficits are, aren't they?

deficit - annual loss
debt - total accumulated loss

if we're running at a deficit of several million, then every year we need to find an additional several million to break even.

Thank you captain obvious. You've saved the world yet again.

What I mean is that our wage bill in the premier wasn't meant to be much over £20 million.

After shipping out virtually all of our big earners, it seems rather odd that our wage bill is still at at least half of our premier league levels.

5 years ago the average salary in this division was supposed to be £4000 a week. Could it really have doubled or more since then?


If, on the other hand, the average wage bill is really is £15 milllion or so, that just seems mental. It makes you wonder what other clubs lose every year.

[ZacNaloen]

Certain clubs behaviour over the last few years will have driven the average up

[Cypry]

The only thing I'd question is if the £4 million deficit is a yearly thing, then why?

That's what deficits are, aren't they?

deficit - annual loss
debt - total accumulated loss

if we're running at a deficit of several million, then every year we need to find an additional several million to break even.

Thank you captain obvious. You've saved the world yet again.

What I mean is that our wage bill in the premier wasn't meant to be much over £20 million.

After shipping out virtually all of our big earners, it seems rather odd that our wage bill is still at at least half of our premier league levels.

5 years ago the average salary in this division was supposed to be £4000 a week. Could it really have doubled or more since then?


If, on the other hand, the average wage bill is really is £15 milllion or so, that just seems mental. It makes you wonder what other clubs lose every year.

In 2009 our wage bill was £27.7M - in 2010 it had dropped to £20.1M....I'd be amazed if last year it was much below £16M...

.....and how are you creating an average from just 30 players?

We've got 40+ players with squad numbers / contracts, then you've got the Manager, physios, fitness coaches, team at Hogwood, caterers, stadium management team, shop staff, stewards, marketing team, media team (need I go on?)......

You simply cannot take a random figure plucked out of the air, divide it by a (wrong) number of players, then start shouting the odds about our wage structure.

We're paying competitive salaries to the players in order to try to be as competitive on the pitch as possible - where we might have a issue is with the sheer size of the squad - with the number of players we've got with squad numbers we could almost field four teams, but I guess that's an upshot of the academy and trying to move players from that environment on to full professional careers....

I just do not get why some people cannot see this, and will base arguments basically disputing anything and everything which comes out of the club on this matter, on made up and very obviously incorrect information....at least what the clubs says has some credibility....

[FiNeRaIn]

We've got 40+ players with squad numbers / contracts, then you've got the Manager, physios, fitness coaches, team at Hogwood, caterers, stadium management team, shop staff, stewards, marketing team, media team (need I go on?)......

Reading fans really will scrape the bottom of the barrel for examples. Catering staff make about 40 quid on a match day, shop staff, stewards

How much of a % do you think they will all be on compared to the playing squad?

Our squad may have 40 players ( doubtful btw) but MOST of those are not proven players and I would be very, very shocked if on average they would be over 4,000 a week or even CLOSE. Pro's like mcanuff, kebe, gorrks, griffin, fed,etc will be on more than that obviously and probably around the 10-15k mark MAXIMUM. There is simply not a chance the club can possibly still be losing 2-4 million a season based on the wages of that playing personnel.

[papereyes]

The only thing I'd question is if the £4 million deficit is a yearly thing, then why?

That's what deficits are, aren't they?

deficit - annual loss
debt - total accumulated loss

if we're running at a deficit of several million, then every year we need to find an additional several million to break even.

Thank you captain obvious. You've saved the world yet again.

What I mean is that our wage bill in the premier wasn't meant to be much over £20 million.

After shipping out virtually all of our big earners, it seems rather odd that our wage bill is still at at least half of our premier league levels.

5 years ago the average salary in this division was supposed to be £4000 a week. Could it really have doubled or more since then?


If, on the other hand, the average wage bill is really is £15 milllion or so, that just seems mental. It makes you wonder what other clubs lose every year.

If its so obvious, why do these threads spawn like satan's own love juice?

[Cypry]

We've got 40+ players with squad numbers / contracts, then you've got the Manager, physios, fitness coaches, team at Hogwood, caterers, stadium management team, shop staff, stewards, marketing team, media team (need I go on?)......

Reading fans really will scrape the bottom of the barrel for examples. Catering staff make about 40 quid on a match day, shop staff, stewards

How much of a % do you think they will all be on compared to the playing squad?

Our squad may have 40 players ( doubtful btw) but MOST of those are not proven players and I would be very, very shocked if on average they would be over 4,000 a week or even CLOSE. Pro's like mcanuff, kebe, gorrks, griffin, fed,etc will be on more than that obviously and probably around the 10-15k mark MAXIMUM. There is simply not a chance the club can possibly still be losing 2-4 million a season based on the wages of that playing personnel.

But it all counts towards the wage bill.....
How many catering staff are there on a match day? There's at least a dozen just in the bar / food bits where I sit, so I imagine there must be at least 100+ throughout the stadium - if they all get £40, that's a bill of £4k per game, multiply by maybe 25 home games including the cups and you're looking at £100k a year just for the general catering outlets and bars - add the waiting staff, bar staff, chefs etc for the hospitality and there's a good few quid there as well - at least enough to pay for a £3k a week player over the course of the year...now add the stewards, shop staff, marketing team, media team, stadium management etc etc etc - you're talking a very significant figure a year in non-playing salaries - perhaps 10% of the total?

I'd be willing to bet my house that the manager, asst. manager, backroom staff etc chew up at least £1M a year between them as well, if not more - spotted one of the physio team rolling up at Bristol Rovers in a spanking Aston Martin, you don't get those on a small salary.

It's also interesting to note how nobody ever takes into account PAYE / NI when they work out how much our players get paid from the overall bill another massive oversight which will make up a significant chunk of the wage bill quoted in the annual reports.

I wasn't "scraping the bottom of the barrel" I was responding to someone who took an estimate of our wage bill, divided it by 30 (his (wrong) estimate of the players in the squad) and then started banging on about how our players average wage is far too high. My point was that our salary bill is composed of a hell of a lot more than 30 players salaries, and if that TOTAL is £2 - 4M higher than our total income for the year, then of course it's possible that we can have that kind of level of deficit....

[Ian Royal]

Wage budget in the Premier League wasn't much more than £20m!

Add 50% again and you're about right.

Every two months we get this, someone posts up some guestimates based on the argument from personal incredulity, or posts up income and ignores vast swathes of expenditure. The real figures are posted up, get ignored or get the response that "we can't be a well run club then", thread peters out, rince and repeat in two months.

The fact is, if you want us to have a prayer of challenging, we need a high wage bill to have decent players. If we have a high wage bill we have to sell players for big money to balance the books, which means when they attract attention from the big boys for being successful.

Unless you want us to run in such a way that our debts accumulate at millons of pounds each year we aren't going to keep players once they're good enough for a move upwards, or make several £1m+ signings a season.

[Man Friday]

The average wage bill in this division is supposed to be £9-10 million or so. I can't believe we can be paying £4 million more than that

??? Who says we are? The Club is saying simply that its expenditure is £4m more than its income. So if its expenditure comprised just wages (which obviously it doesn't) and was the supposed avarage in this division of £10m then income is £6m.