Hard to see any progress for the forseeable future

[readingbedding]

Agreed, of course, about the January window, but I worry a bit about the lack of strength in depth. I like Henry and Long, but if we get any long-running/bad combination of injuries/suspensions over this season (eg up front) will we still be OK? I was happy having Lita in reserve, (in theory) itching to prove he's worth a place. There is no doubt he has the ability at this level.

Federici's gone. Would the new back-up do the job as well?

On loan, Apart from Blackburn away, I can't remember Marcus being subbed.

[brendywendy]

One year on and we're playing in front of 4,000+ empty seats every week. History proved me to be right.

before we went to the prem we were playing in front of around 14-17k depending on opposition and had 8k season ticket holders?? im guessing, please fill me in if wrong on teh numbers

then we went up and could have sold a few thousand extra seats most weeks if wed had them cos we pretty much sold out nearly every game.

now we are getting 18-21K a week whoever the opposition, and if we go up again, im sure there will be even more people wanting to get in who cant than last time

this is the reason why i think building the extra capacity wouldnt have been such a bad idea
it gives us the potential, so that when we do go up, we are not crippled by our inability to spend much again, as moaned about by many. it would mean that we may well get 30+k vs the big 4, and be able to fill more seats than we can now against anyone else, bringing in the extra revenue required to compete more effectively at the top level.

it also gives us more room to do special deals, kids for a quid, cheaper lower profile games, and thus grow our clubs fan base so that eventually we do fill our 38K ground almost every week.

i cannot really see why anyone who was interested in the future of this club would think this was an awful idea before we went down.

people made all the same arguents when moving from EP to the madstad, and no one could now argue it wasnt the best thing we could have done.
if we go up again we will be wishing we had done it, cos now well have to wait another season minimum before we can start bringing in nearly double our gate receipts( even if infrequently)

[Wycombe Royal]

1. The last time there was a thread like this was to do with the extention where I was roundly mocked, particularly by the morbidly ignorant such as yourself, for suggesting that the extention was a bad idea as there was unlikely to be the demand to fill the existing capacity going forward. One year on and we're playing in front of 4,000+ empty seats every week.

Personally I would still rather have the extension going ahead so if (or should that be when ) we return to the Premiership we have a stadium in place that will enable the club to keep prices slightly lower and to cope with the demand. As it stands we will have to suffer huge increases in prices again.........

[Arch]

As I have said repeatedly, it is no foregone conclusion that we will sell Doyle and Hunt in January because for that to happen someone needs to be in a position to splash some cash and their won't be much of that flying around for a while; but anyway, top-team Birmingham are more likely to need to sell players than Reading in January.

Some of this is guesswork but I guess most would agree:

> Their ground is significantly larger than ours and, although their average attendance is marginally higher in numbers, it is much smaller than ours in percentage of capacity (66% to our 80%). This will presumably mean they are generating less net income from matches.

> They had a much higher net outflow of funds in transfers both last season and this pre-season and are therefore likley to be carrying higher short-term debt.

> They have a higher wage bill.

> They have no-one of any note coming through to the 1st team from their Academy.

> They have owners who are far more disenchanted with owning a football club than we have.

So anyway, regarding the issue of selling best players in January, at the moment I would suggest that Birmingham are more likely than Reading to go down that route, and even if we do, in Coppell we have a manager who knows exactly what is required to build a promotion winning team on a budget. Birmingham don't have that and Wolves, well, Wolves have Mick McCarthy. (Actually, I do rate him but not in Coppell's league.)

How does this sit with what Reading did close season and what Birmingham did close season - a period which, some might argue, might provide an indication of what may happen in January?

Birmingham lost Muamba, Kapo, Forssell and De Ridder and they brought in Phillips (34), Carsley (34) and Bent (32), plus two very useful loan signings. So they lost some important players and replaced them with high-wage players who were a good bet to be a short term fix. We lost important players and have replaced them with players who were a longer bet to be a longer-term fix. As for selling in January, Larsson and McFadden were as much part of the transfer gossip rounds as Doyle and Hunt. So we've gone different routes, but I wouldn't think we're worse off than they are either from the point of view of keeping our players or of seeing progress for the future. Given how our new players are contributing, I'd say our long-term prospects are currently brighter than theirs.

[CMRoyal]

Agreed, of course, about the January window, but I worry a bit about the lack of strength in depth. I like Henry and Long, but if we get any long-running/bad combination of injuries/suspensions over this season (eg up front) will we still be OK? I was happy having Lita in reserve, (in theory) itching to prove he's worth a place. There is no doubt he has the ability at this level.

Federici's gone. Would the new back-up do the job as well?

He wouldn't need to because Fed would be called back. As for strength in depth? Yeah, arguably we could all fret over most positions. Has Kelly shown any sign that he’d be an adequate long-term replacement for Rosey or Stretch? Is M-u-r-t-y likely to be able to pick up where he left off? Does Golbourne look like 1st team material? What happens if Doobs never quite gets back to his old self? Can Henry step up if/when Kebe has a dip? Is Convey getting stale? Where’s the forward with even a modicum of Doyler’s strength and ability to run at defenders, let alone finish as well as he does?

The again, who was going to replace Shorey? What were we going to do with Bikey being away? Where was the solidity in central midfield without Bryn? Or the creativity in the absence of Marek? Would Shunt or Doyle be able to get over their (lack of) transfer disappointment? Would we ever have a forward who could dovetail with Kevin now that Kits was gone? Time and again SC and the boys have answered the question to our satisfaction this season, so at the moment I see no reason not to have a little faith that they are ready to address any further questions more than adequately.

[Alan Partridge]

Agreed, of course, about the January window, but I worry a bit about the lack of strength in depth. I like Henry and Long, but if we get any long-running/bad combination of injuries/suspensions over this season (eg up front) will we still be OK? I was happy having Lita in reserve, (in theory) itching to prove he's worth a place. There is no doubt he has the ability at this level.

Federici's gone. Would the new back-up do the job as well?

On loan, Apart from Blackburn away, I can't remember Marcus being subbed.

Tottenham away and Stoke at home a few years ago, only ones i can remember. Federici would be called back if and when required.

I agree with Lux, was tempted to start a thread on how strong is our squad really but nah N Hunt's knock on Saturday got me thinking if he was out for a long time (by that let's say a month) would we be able to cope with it? In theory we have 5 strikers on the books, in reality we have 2 that are doing the business for us and the rest all have huge ? marks next to their names, for differing reasons.

Of course injuries to any clubs key players is going to affect them, however I think we could cope without Bikey, we've coped without Matejovsky, I think we could probably cope without S Hunt, Doyle and N Hunt are absolutely vital to Reading currently. I actually thought Long did quite well saturday even without the goal I thought he looked better but I don't think he's good enough to warrant regular football here, nor could he succesfully cover an injury for a significant period of time.

[Wealdstone at home]

As I have said repeatedly, it is no foregone conclusion that we will sell Doyle and Hunt in January because for that to happen someone needs to be in a position to splash some cash and their won't be much of that flying around for a while; but anyway, top-team Birmingham are more likely to need to sell players than Reading in January.

Some of this is guesswork but I guess most would agree:

> Their ground is significantly larger than ours and, although their average attendance is marginally higher in numbers, it is much smaller than ours in percentage of capacity (66% to our 80%). This will presumably mean they are generating less net income from matches.

> They had a much higher net outflow of funds in transfers both last season and this pre-season and are therefore likley to be carrying higher short-term debt.

> They have a higher wage bill.

> They have no-one of any note coming through to the 1st team from their Academy.

> They have owners who are far more disenchanted with owning a football club than we have.

So anyway, regarding the issue of selling best players in January, at the moment I would suggest that Birmingham are more likely than Reading to go down that route, and even if we do, in Coppell we have a manager who knows exactly what is required to build a promotion winning team on a budget. Birmingham don't have that and Wolves, well, Wolves have Mick McCarthy. (Actually, I do rate him but not in Coppell's league.)

How does this sit with what Reading did close season and what Birmingham did close season - a period which, some might argue, might provide an indication of what may happen in January?

Birmingham lost Muamba, Kapo, Forssell and De Ridder and they brought in Phillips (34), Carsley (34) and Bent (32), plus two very useful loan signings. So they lost some important players and replaced them with high-wage players who were a good bet to be a short term fix. We lost important players and have replaced them with players who were a longer bet to be a longer-term fix. As for selling in January, Larsson and McFadden were as much part of the transfer gossip rounds as Doyle and Hunt. So we've gone different routes, but I wouldn't think we're worse off than they are either from the point of view of keeping our players or of seeing progress for the future. Given how our new players are contributing, I'd say our long-term prospects are currently brighter than theirs.

Absolutely spot on - I cannot believe sometimes that some posters do not see the massive advantages both long term and short term in the strategy of our Chairman and Manager. We should be proud of their nowse and ability - not bloody moaning. Oh, I forgot, we're RFC fans - so we like moaning and missing the blatantly obvious and wanting 'has-been' star names draining our resources whilst insincerely 'kissing the badge' before getting injured for weeks.....

[Royal Lady]

Who mentioned "has-beens"?

[Wealdstone at home]

Who mentioned "has-beens"?

Bent, Carsley and Phillips - best is past - future is short.

Sonko, Kitson - best is past (Lita, Shorey and Sidders too maybe)

McFadden - maybe his best is ahead of him; as he's been completely overrated, overpaid crap up to this point of his career (Apart from a mis-hit clearance against France for the Jocks)

Our players have promise, hunger, purpose and motivation and play as a team and most of all, most of them have a brighter future than their past.

[londinium]

Schards, can you spell "extension" properly next time, please? Oh and you make a 20K attendance sound like a bad thing. 4K empty seats, so what? As the season progresses, you can expect more people coming back to see the mighty Royals make a charge on promotion and we'll probably see some sell-outs against the bigger clubs such as Birmingham and Wolves. I would prefer a 30K attendance and 4K empty seats as that would mean that people like me would have more of a chance of buying a ticket as late as possible.

A fair number of empty seats were in the visitors' end.


RE the proposed extension; I don't know if it's possible to do the proposed extension in stages but that would seem sensible.

It all depends on how many extra seats would need to be sold in order to cover the cost of the work. Would the occasional sell out be enough or would we need 30,000 each game to break even?

Maybe if they opened half of the South Stand to home supporters they would get more - I wanted 3 tickets for Saturday but was left with row A behind the goal in the North Stand so I didnt bother.

The next 2 games are almost as bad - I think i can get row g, right behind the goal.
It was actually easier to get decent seats when we were in the Prem as we had half of the South Stand

[brendywendy]

14000 extra seats
30 pound a seat
=£420,000 per game
18 home games
=7 million if we fill every seat for every game.


which we wont.

cost of expansion=loads more than 7 million


.....what we need is a sugar daddy who will build it for free.....

[Thaumagurist*]

Schards, can you spell "extension" properly next time, please? Oh and you make a 20K attendance sound like a bad thing. 4K empty seats, so what? As the season progresses, you can expect more people coming back to see the mighty Royals make a charge on promotion and we'll probably see some sell-outs against the bigger clubs such as Birmingham and Wolves. I would prefer a 30K attendance and 4K empty seats as that would mean that people like me would have more of a chance of buying a ticket as late as possible.

A fair number of empty seats were in the visitors' end.

Actually, that's a very good point, the home stands may be packed out, but can the club do anything about the away fans? No.

RE the proposed extension; I don't know if it's possible to do the proposed extension in stages but that would seem sensible.

I think they had proposed to do it in two stages, the North and South stands first and then the East Stand. Or is it the other way round?

[londinium]

14000 extra seats
30 pound a seat
=£420,000 per game
18 home games
=7 million if we fill every seat for every game.


which we wont.

cost of expansion=loads more than 7 million


.....what we need is a sugar daddy who will build it for free.....

Firstly - why only 18 home games and not 19?

Secondly - do you have to re-coup the outlay of a new stand in the first year or it falls down?

Or are you banking on us being in the prem for just one season and never fill the seats ever again?

[brendywendy]

14000 extra seats
30 pound a seat
=£420,000 per game
18 home games
=7 million if we fill every seat for every game.


which we wont.

cost of expansion=loads more than 7 million


.....what we need is a sugar daddy who will build it for free.....

Firstly - why only 18 home games and not 19?

Secondly - do you have to re-coup the outlay of a new stand in the first year or it falls down?

Or are you banking on us being in the prem for just one season and never fill the seats ever again?

its 18 games because im an innumerate idiot
no you dont, but we wont see much of the financial benefit of the extra gate receipts until we do

im for the expansion, its a great idea
was just spelling out the financials for whoever asked

[Mr Angry]

Whilst I feel that the only way Reading FC could bcome an established Premiership team IS by expanding the stadium, that clearly isn't going to happen for a few years yet - firstly, we have to get back into the Premiership, and then look as if we are going to be staying there for more than a couple of seasons before it would even be contemplated.

Even if all those things were in place now, I think that plans for expansion would have been shelved anyway due to the credit crunch, as it would have been difficult to raise the neccesary funds at a reasonable price at this time (I understand that the costs equate to approx £1000 per seat for the expansion; therefore, additional 14,000 seats = £14M).

However longer term, I would imagine that it is still in the plans.

What I don't understand are those that think expansion plans are, in some way, wrong, yet accuse the club of "lacking ambition"!

[brendywendy]

so wed repay it within 2-4 (dependant on how many of the seats we fill)years if we spent all the cash on repayments
thats not so bad


i agree, its the only way we will ever be able to compete, and still be financially sound

[Royal Lady]

And then we have this thread

More proof, if any was needed, that Mr Sadb@rstard ALWAYS lacks the mental capacity/ maturity to admit he's wrong; prefering to make an utter idiot of both himself and his wife.

I say, I don't need Schards to make me look an utter idiot! Still, you can't defend the defensible, eh?

[Southbank Old Boy]

It is a shame that Coppell's heart is not in it anymore.
Has anyone seen the spirit of the Championship winning side?

I'm catching up a bit here, but to be fair, the spirit amongst the players was pretty shattered and half of them didn't want to be here

Hunt has even been in the papers recently saying he's now rediscovered his hunger for the club/team/promotion charge and so it follows that there were serious problems. Thankfully time is a great healer and we seem to have been able to pull out the other side.

At least for now, but long may it continue

[rg6royal]

The team seem to have bonded together and are now producing on the pitch.