A bit worrying

[The 17 Bus]

I read it like that too, I have alos posted G Heale for you drool over.

[rabidbee]

Yeah, that's how it was written. "If we could get gates of 26,000, then expanding to 30,000 would be a good idea".

[Mr Angry]

I don't understand how we can guarantee a consistent average of 26K gates UNTIL we have expanded to 30K.

I also think that with the exception of Oxf**d (and their circumstances are unique) EVERY team that has moved into a bigger stadium have increased their average gates; why would we be any different (notwithstanding that we would need to be in th premier League to make it pay).

I also note that you have ignored my main point which is that you had a pop at Sir Mad for not wanting to invest, yet also have a pop at him for wanting to invest. You can't take both positions - to do so would be, to use your word, puerile.

[Platypuss]

As our esteemed leader appears to be trousering all the transfer money at the moment I can't think of a better use of 15 mill.

Agreed. Schards seems to be quite adept at avoiding that point, however.

You're going to have to explain to me what the point is. I've long given up reading anything posted by Royal with Cheese.

How about:

"And also the point that if we're not going to spend Premiership profits on players (Schards' other bete noir), surely the extension is the next best thing?"

[rfcjoe]

Garn my threadddd!

[Dirk Gently]

Never forget that we will nearly always be able to sell much of any extra capacity - we just may not be able to fill it at £30 a ticket.

But Bradford City are selling £100 a year STs in Tier 4 and getting 3 times the average attendance of that league, so whilst you may not be getting all the money back in real terms, the benefit on atmosphere and future growth is phenomenal for the less popular games.

I'd be delighted if we sold an extra 5k kids' season tickets for a quid each, and I don't think that's unrealistic as a target. Yes, income would go down because all kids' prices would have to come down, but the vast majority of those kids would would need an adult to accompany them - and we'd have the next generation of Reading supporters groomed and ready for the future.

Investment needn't just be a short-term thing, and the payback needn't be purely financial.

[Baines]

^^^ spot on Dirk (it is characteristically depressing that the suggestion that price might influence the vexed question of demand should be so widely ignored by so many on this thread).

And given the high average age of football supporters these days, this kind of investment could be the most vital of all.

[Rex]

I agree with incentives such as the lower priced tickets for games. Was it Burnley or Barnsley who have a reciprocal agreement with us to lower ticket prices for children. Sadly not as much of this going on this season as i would have hoped.

[Woodcote Royal]

Never forget that we will nearly always be able to sell much of any extra capacity - we just may not be able to fill it at £30 a ticket.

But Bradford City are selling £100 a year STs in Tier 4 and getting 3 times the average attendance of that league, so whilst you may not be getting all the money back in real terms, the benefit on atmosphere and future growth is phenomenal for the less popular games.

I'd be delighted if we sold an extra 5k kids' season tickets for a quid each, and I don't think that's unrealistic as a target. Yes, income would go down because all kids' prices would have to come down, but the vast majority of those kids would would need an adult to accompany them - and we'd have the next generation of Reading supporters groomed and ready for the future.

Investment needn't just be a short-term thing, and the payback needn't be purely financial.

Spot on.

As things stand, a return to the top flight next season will see another campaign of very few "kids for a quid" and very few new fans or neutrals getting tickets..................not that this will bother Mr Selfish of the East in the slightest.

[Woodcote Royal]

It takes a special type of person to consider an 18,000 gate a vindication of their position that the capacity should be expanded from 24,000 - emoticon or no emoticon.

Only someone who can't bring themselves to admit to the shortsightedness of the utter drivel they wrote after a certain match in Suffolk would also refuse to accept the possibility of our stadium looking smaller by the day given the likelihood of a swift return to the Premiership and 75% occupancy for a televised match versus 2nd tier relegation candidates when the temperature was somewhere south of -5C.

However, fear not, expansion is still on the agenda and I'm guessing this will mean re-location for at least one set of blinkers.........................

I don't really see what there is to "fear" even if it went ahead. It would just mean th football club I support has wasted £15million+, irritating? Yes, fear inducing? No. As it's clearly not on the agenda and is not going to happen your comments can be cheerfully filed in the irrelevent drawer....as per

Nice one to add to a long list, thanks!!!

[Schards#2]

I don't understand how we can guarantee a consistent average of 26K gates UNTIL we have expanded to 30K.

I also think that with the exception of Oxf**d (and their circumstances are unique) EVERY team that has moved into a bigger stadium have increased their average gates; why would we be any different (notwithstanding that we would need to be in th premier League to make it pay).

I also note that you have ignored my main point which is that you had a pop at Sir Mad for not wanting to invest, yet also have a pop at him for wanting to invest. You can't take both positions - to do so would be, to use your word, puerile.

I don't see where I said anything about guarantees. In answer to a previous question, I said that if an ongoing average of 26,000 in a 30,000 stadium could be confidently anticipated then IN MY OPINION that would make it worthwhile. Also IN MY OPINION there is no evidence that this club can sustain an average of that magnitude. My opinion, you can, and no doubt do, hold a different one. I would also suggest that moving stadium and expanding a stadium are two very different things. Moving from Elm Park to the Madejski totally changed the viewing experience for all fans and a greater number were prepared to pay for the new rather than the old. Expanding won't change the experience, it'll just make more of the same available.

As for you main point. I want him to invest in the team, I don't want him to invest in the expansion. I believe that whilst he is looking to sell, investment in the team will be restricted and this doesn't help the club progress. Simple really, and in no way purile.

[Schards#2]

Agreed. Schards seems to be quite adept at avoiding that point, however.

You're going to have to explain to me what the point is. I've long given up reading anything posted by Royal with Cheese.

How about:

"And also the point that if we're not going to spend Premiership profits on players (Schards' other bete noir), surely the extension is the next best thing?"

Why would the extention be the next best thing. It's a £15 million + outlay on something that, IN MY OPINION, will barely be used.

Bolstering the acadamy, subsidising tickets for children/schools, clearing debt, they are many many better options.

[Schards#2]

Never forget that we will nearly always be able to sell much of any extra capacity - we just may not be able to fill it at £30 a ticket.

But Bradford City are selling £100 a year STs in Tier 4 and getting 3 times the average attendance of that league, so whilst you may not be getting all the money back in real terms, the benefit on atmosphere and future growth is phenomenal for the less popular games.

I'd be delighted if we sold an extra 5k kids' season tickets for a quid each, and I don't think that's unrealistic as a target. Yes, income would go down because all kids' prices would have to come down, but the vast majority of those kids would would need an adult to accompany them - and we'd have the next generation of Reading supporters groomed and ready for the future.

Investment needn't just be a short-term thing, and the payback needn't be purely financial.

Spot on.

As things stand, a return to the top flight next season will see another campaign of very few "kids for a quid" and very few new fans or neutrals getting tickets..................not that this will bother Mr Selfish of the East in the slightest.

How old are you?

[Sun Tzu]

Schards you are always very quick to tell people to 'read what you wrote' and to respond to WHAT YOU WROTE rather than what you intended to right really doesn't deserve to be labelled as 'puerile'.

Anyway, let's put that to one side....

It's interesting that you now think that an extension to 30k would be justified if we then got crowds of 26k in it. That's not a huge leap from the sell out crowds we saw in the Prem. Especially when you consider that most Prem clubs would comfortably bring more than 2k fans if we had an expanded away section and that previously there was next to no room for promotional marketing.

I suspect your previous comments about expansion not being on the club's agenda and such like are one's you now regret if you are back tracking like this. If all it takes for the expansion to be justified is a fairly modest increase in attendances then once promotion becomes a reality (whenever that might be) the plans will be out and we'll see work commencing I'm sure !

[Schards#2]

Schards you are always very quick to tell people to 'read what you wrote' and to respond to WHAT YOU WROTE rather than what you intended to right really doesn't deserve to be labelled as 'puerile'.

Anyway, let's put that to one side....

It's interesting that you now think that an extension to 30k would be justified if we then got crowds of 26k in it. That's not a huge leap from the sell out crowds we saw in the Prem. Especially when you consider that most Prem clubs would comfortably bring more than 2k fans if we had an expanded away section and that previously there was next to no room for promotional marketing.

I suspect your previous comments about expansion not being on the club's agenda and such like are one's you now regret if you are back tracking like this. If all it takes for the expansion to be justified is a fairly modest increase in attendances then once promotion becomes a reality (whenever that might be) the plans will be out and we'll see work commencing I'm sure !

With regard to your first point, it really does deserve to be labelled purile unless you seriously believed that I was saying that we had to average 26,000 in a stadium that holds 24,000 before we expand. At a stretch, the comment could be read two ways but as one is reasonable and the other entirely nonsensical , it's perfectly clear what's being said and diverting the thread down the other interpretation is simply a distraction and a waste of my time in explaining what is perfectly obvious to you any way.

Such a response is typical of you and several other posters who look at every post I make from the angle of 'how can I criticise this' regardless of its content. I would not have normally considered Mr Angry as such a poster.

With regard to the second point, I don't believe we can average 26,000 if we stayed in the premiership and I don't think we will stay in the premiership for prolonged periods in any case. I also don't think the extention is currently on the agenda or will be on any future agenda. Absolutely no change in my position at any stage.

[Sun Tzu]

Schards you are always very quick to tell people to 'read what you wrote' and to respond to WHAT YOU WROTE rather than what you intended to right really doesn't deserve to be labelled as 'puerile'.

Anyway, let's put that to one side....

It's interesting that you now think that an extension to 30k would be justified if we then got crowds of 26k in it. That's not a huge leap from the sell out crowds we saw in the Prem. Especially when you consider that most Prem clubs would comfortably bring more than 2k fans if we had an expanded away section and that previously there was next to no room for promotional marketing.

I suspect your previous comments about expansion not being on the club's agenda and such like are one's you now regret if you are back tracking like this. If all it takes for the expansion to be justified is a fairly modest increase in attendances then once promotion becomes a reality (whenever that might be) the plans will be out and we'll see work commencing I'm sure !

With regard to your first point, it really does deserve to be labelled purile unless you seriously believed that I was saying that we had to average 26,000 in a stadium that holds 24,000 before we expand. At a stretch, the comment could be read two ways but as one is reasonable and the other entirely nonsensical , it's perfectly clear what's being said and diverting the thread down the other interpretation is simply a distraction and a waste of my time in explaining what is perfectly obvious to you any way.

Such a response is typical of you and several other posters who look at every post I make from the angle of 'how can I criticise this' regardless of its content. I would not have normally considered Mr Angry as such a poster.

With regard to the second point, I don't believe we can average 26,000 if we stayed in the premiership and I don't think we will stay in the premiership for prolonged periods in any case. I also don't think the extention is currently on the agenda or will be on any future agenda. Absolutely no change in my position at any stage.

Sadly Schards your response is only too typical of your graceless, humourless, self obsessed contributions.

I await the apology for the lie in your third paragraph.

[Mr Angry]

Schards - re-reading your point about 26K attendances and I can see where you are coming from though I still maintain no-one can know if there would be that level of support in a 30K stadium until its built. Also, thanks for answering my main point re: the seemingly paradoxical position of slagging of Sir Mad for both not wanting to invest, and for wanting to invest. Bluntly, its not investment in the club you want, its investment in the team.

Whilst I appreciate that its your opinion, I'm appalled that you hold such an opinion.

What you are saying is that Sir Mad should throw money at the team in the search of short term glory, rather than invest in infrastructure which would then finance further investment in the team which would then enable long term security and progress.

I'm amazed that a fellow Tory could have such a short-sighted view of economics Schards!



Investing in infrastructure to help finance investment in the team has been how this club grew from being basically bankrupt in 1990, to going into the Premiership in 2006, and as such is held up as a model by other clubs as one which has been followed succesfully by teams such as Hull and Swansea.

Regardless of our performances on the pitch, this is something that, as a Reading fan, I take pride in my club about.

Yes, let the multi Billionaires throw millions and millions of their money at their latest big boy toy of a top flight football team to buy a team from nothing; yes let some wannabe mogul chuck vast amounts of cash they have no chance of ever recouping to try and be seen as some sort of folk hero to the masses whilst endangering the survival of the club that they are merely a custodian of.......good luck to them. I'm proud that we are different to that and the day that changes will be a sad one for RFC.

In my opinion the way we have progressed since the days I stood on the terraces at Elm Park has been little short of inspirational in this day and age of get rich quick attitudes to football, and I would rather we stayed in the Championship rather than blow millions and millions on players that we as a club couldn't afford and which might put our long term financial stability in jeopardy for the sake of making some fans happy for a short period of time.

[Woodcote Royal]

Never forget that we will nearly always be able to sell much of any extra capacity - we just may not be able to fill it at £30 a ticket.

But Bradford City are selling £100 a year STs in Tier 4 and getting 3 times the average attendance of that league, so whilst you may not be getting all the money back in real terms, the benefit on atmosphere and future growth is phenomenal for the less popular games.

I'd be delighted if we sold an extra 5k kids' season tickets for a quid each, and I don't think that's unrealistic as a target. Yes, income would go down because all kids' prices would have to come down, but the vast majority of those kids would would need an adult to accompany them - and we'd have the next generation of Reading supporters groomed and ready for the future.

Investment needn't just be a short-term thing, and the payback needn't be purely financial.

Spot on.

As things stand, a return to the top flight next season will see another campaign of very few "kids for a quid" and very few new fans or neutrals getting tickets..................not that this will bother Mr Selfish of the East in the slightest.

How old are you?

Old enough to laugh at a middle aged man whose capacity to make an absolute fool of himself remains a bottomless pit.

[rabidbee]

puerile, from the Latin puer, child.

[Schards#2]

Schards - re-reading your point about 26K attendances and I can see where you are coming from though I still maintain no-one can know if there would be that level of support in a 30K stadium until its built. Also, thanks for answering my main point re: the seemingly paradoxical position of slagging of Sir Mad for both not wanting to invest, and for wanting to invest. Bluntly, its not investment in the club you want, its investment in the team.

Whilst I appreciate that its your opinion, I'm appalled that you hold such an opinion.

What you are saying is that Sir Mad should throw money at the team in the search of short term glory, rather than invest in infrastructure which would then finance further investment in the team which would then enable long term security and progress.

I'm amazed that a fellow Tory could have such a short-sighted view of economics Schards!



Investing in infrastructure to help finance investment in the team has been how this club grew from being basically bankrupt in 1990, to going into the Premiership in 2006, and as such is held up as a model by other clubs as one which has been followed succesfully by teams such as Hull and Swansea.

Regardless of our performances on the pitch, this is something that, as a Reading fan, I take pride in my club about.

Yes, let the multi Billionaires throw millions and millions of their money at their latest big boy toy of a top flight football team to buy a team from nothing; yes let some wannabe mogul chuck vast amounts of cash they have no chance of ever recouping to try and be seen as some sort of folk hero to the masses whilst endangering the survival of the club that they are merely a custodian of.......good luck to them. I'm proud that we are different to that and the day that changes will be a sad one for RFC.

In my opinion the way we have progressed since the days I stood on the terraces at Elm Park has been little short of inspirational in this day and age of get rich quick attitudes to football, and I would rather we stayed in the Championship rather than blow millions and millions on players that we as a club couldn't afford and which might put our long term financial stability in jeopardy for the sake of making some fans happy for a short period of time.

Investing in infrastructure in only going to produce a long term return if the demand is there to use the infrastructure once it's in place, otherwise it's completely wasted and this is where our opinions differ. If I thought the facility would be used then I would consider it a reasonable use of resources but, whilst it is impossible to be certain, I believe the evidence is there that demand to the tail end of 05/06 and the whole of 06/07 were a high water mark for the club because of factors in those seasons which cannot be replecated. The latest straw in the wind would be the take up of half seasons tickets this season compared to 05/06 when the flew off the shelves.

Moving on, investing in the team does not by defination "doing a Leeds" or throwing tens of millions. It is not black and white, there are several shades of grey. I would like to see more money invested but not to the extent where the club is put at risk. With the nbenefit of hindsight, few could argue that a bit more investment this time last year maty have profoundly changed the outcome of last season. This year, far from throwing millions at the team, simply reinvesting a higher percentage of the incoming transfer fees would have represented a greater investment. In this window, doing what is necessary to maintain the current squad may be all that it necessary, it remains to be seen whether this will happen if our resolve is tested over our key players. This is a world away from the Billionairre's plaything scenario.

If Madejski was fully committed, i'd love him to stay but he wants to sell and I believe this will impact on the level of investment while the situation remains. I don't believe it will effect the extention decision as I believe this is in the long grass in any case.