Confimred - Bindon to Nottingham Forest

[Brogue]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

[Clyde1998]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

Would be surprised if it was all up front, tbh. I’d hope a sell on clause is included in that.

If it is Arsenal, I’d expect we would be able to get him back on loan until the end of the season fairly easily.

[Greatwesternline]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

I'm amazed that your source continues to leak to you knowing full well it goes straight on hobnob. Not criticising you, just surprised that person is so sanguine about allowing their inside info to splashed around.

[Royals and Racers]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

I am more than happy to accept apologies

[Whore Jackie]

This unfortunately.
I have been convinced from day one that he is destined for much higher and we should thank whoever spotted him in the first place.
Quite a bit of the John Stones about him.

The best centre-back prospect we have had for years-the last really good one was Steve Wood who we sold to Millwall and but for injuries IMHO would have had a good career at the top level.

Agreed on whoever scouted him out. He’s looked quality from day 1. Wonder who it was. We have some very keen talent spotters in and around the academy

I believe there was an element of luck in it rather than brilliant scouting, his family moved to the area from the US last summer.

Yep, his mum was appointed coach at London City Lionesses. Took a photo of him with his very proud parents after his first match for Reading against Wimbledon in Alicante.

[The Royal Forester]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

Would be surprised if it was all up front, tbh. I’d hope a sell on clause is included in that.

If it is Arsenal, I’d expect we would be able to get him back on loan until the end of the season fairly easily.

Didn't the EFL stop us signing a player on loan or on a free transfer until the club is sold? I don't think Campbell's loan was easy was it?

[Hendo]

Would be gutted to lose him, but yeah if it's going to be £9m - you can't turn that down.

Ideal situation would be for him to come back on loan for the rest of the season, but I guess we'll just see what happens.

[BarryWhiteRFC]

This is my take on it. Take the money. As much as it means Dai won't be forced to sell, it means we can survive to the end of the season at least on the money with no points deduction. Rueben and the academy are just becoming a pure talent culturing machine. To the point, eventually young talent will pick coming to Reading over larger clubs, as they know they will get their opportunity here. It may not bring the club success playing so many academy prospects, but I tell you what, it's much more fun watching our academy players playing for the first team than 11 ex-prem journeymen and overrated expensive talent. Long may this continue. Probably the only good thing to come out of this whole situation with Dai.

Lets create a conveyer belt of talent through Reading FC.

[tidus_mi2]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

If true, hopefully gives leverage for the club to negotiate some transfer activity in January, obviously wouldn't want the club to spend the lot but being able to strengthen the squad with even 10% of the fee would be something right? Hell, even if they keep us on free transfers only that might be fine.

Gotta hope for a juicy sell on as well.

[Clyde1998]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

Would be surprised if it was all up front, tbh. I’d hope a sell on clause is included in that.

If it is Arsenal, I’d expect we would be able to get him back on loan until the end of the season fairly easily.

Didn't the EFL stop us signing a player on loan or on a free transfer until the club is sold? I don't think Campbell's loan was easy was it?

I imagine the big issue is whether the club could cover the costs. Getting a player we've just sold back on loan should be the easiest transfer to get approved.

[Clyde1998]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

If true, hopefully gives leverage for the club to negotiate some transfer activity in January, obviously wouldn't want the club to spend the lot but being able to strengthen the squad with even 10% of the fee would be something right? Hell, even if they keep us on free transfers only that might be fine.

Gotta hope for a juicy sell on as well.

10% would be £900k - if we say that's all used upfront, that would be the equivalent to around 3.5 average salaried (~£5k p/w) League One players for a year. That should at the very least give us the scope to bring in one or two free transfers or loanees until the end of the season.

[Snowflake Royal]

spoke to my contact. The club interested is Arsenal. And the 9 mill is correct, but its not 9 mill upfront.

If true, hopefully gives leverage for the club to negotiate some transfer activity in January, obviously wouldn't want the club to spend the lot but being able to strengthen the squad with even 10% of the fee would be something right? Hell, even if they keep us on free transfers only that might be fine.

Gotta hope for a juicy sell on as well.

Even if we get permission to make a signing or two, I think we can't pay fees until at least summer 25. Might be Jan 26.

[Millsy]

£9million? I'll piggyback him there wherever it is myself.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

This is my take on it. Take the money. As much as it means Dai won't be forced to sell, it means we can survive to the end of the season at least on the money with no points deduction. Rueben and the academy are just becoming a pure talent culturing machine. To the point, eventually young talent will pick coming to Reading over larger clubs, as they know they will get their opportunity here. It may not bring the club success playing so many academy prospects, but I tell you what, it's much more fun watching our academy players playing for the first team than 11 ex-prem journeymen and overrated expensive talent. Long may this continue. Probably the only good thing to come out of this whole situation with Dai.

Lets create a conveyer belt of talent through Reading FC.

Spot on. Agree with you 100%.

[JedMaxwell]

We'd obviously have to take £9m for him, but unfortunately I fear we'll either lose him in January for a pittance or for free in the summer. The only way we're keeping him for longer in my opinion is if we get promoted, which I can't see happening for a good while yet.

The boy is going to the top though, and I for one will happily watch his journey.

[Stranded]

Is his deal definitely up this summer? I know it was announced as a 2 year deal but we often keep quiet about the club having a clause to extend it - Azeez for example had such a clause.

So if Bindon has similar and I would be moderately surprised if he doesn't then, 9m feels more realistic.

[Clyde1998]

Is his deal definitely up this summer? I know it was announced as a 2 year deal but we often keep quiet about the club having a clause to extend it - Azeez for example had such a clause.

So if Bindon has similar and I would be moderately surprised if he doesn't then, 9m feels more realistic.

I don't think the club talks about these clauses for their younger players. The only one I think we knew about was Perreira, yet Ehibhatiomhan; Wareham; Craig and Dorsett also all had their clauses triggered in addition to Azeez. We also triggered one year extensions for five of the U21s, none of whom we knew had clauses.

It's possible players we sold in January, who would've been out of contract in the summer, also had a one year extension - Vickers and Abbey most pertinently. That could've allowed us to get more money for them than we otherwise would have.

[Snowflake Royal]

Is his deal definitely up this summer? I know it was announced as a 2 year deal but we often keep quiet about the club having a clause to extend it - Azeez for example had such a clause.

So if Bindon has similar and I would be moderately surprised if he doesn't then, 9m feels more realistic.

I don't think the club talks about these clauses for their younger players. The only one I think we knew about was Perreira, yet Ehibhatiomhan; Wareham; Craig and Dorsett also all had their clauses triggered in addition to Azeez. We also triggered one year extensions for five of the U21s, none of whom we knew had clauses.

It's possible players we sold in January, who would've been out of contract in the summer, also had a one year extension - Vickers and Abbey most pertinently. That could've allowed us to get more money for them than we otherwise would have.

Yeah it's a good point, I think there's heaps more examples... weren't Abrefa and Anderson also thought to be ooc in preseason and got options extended, I think.

I would expect it to be a routine clause in youth player contracts when they're on edge of the first team.

Minimises risk of losing someone you want, especially cheap, but limits your exposure to being stuck for four years with once promising, now lame duck players.

Which i felt was an issue with some of our youth not too long ago.

Saying that, £9m is still clearly misleading. Anything like that would be bound to include most of it only being paid after x PL appearances or starts.

[Stranded]

Is his deal definitely up this summer? I know it was announced as a 2 year deal but we often keep quiet about the club having a clause to extend it - Azeez for example had such a clause.

So if Bindon has similar and I would be moderately surprised if he doesn't then, 9m feels more realistic.

I don't think the club talks about these clauses for their younger players. The only one I think we knew about was Perreira, yet Ehibhatiomhan; Wareham; Craig and Dorsett also all had their clauses triggered in addition to Azeez. We also triggered one year extensions for five of the U21s, none of whom we knew had clauses.

It's possible players we sold in January, who would've been out of contract in the summer, also had a one year extension - Vickers and Abbey most pertinently. That could've allowed us to get more money for them than we otherwise would have.

Yeah it's a good point, I think there's heaps more examples... weren't Abrefa and Anderson also thought to be ooc in preseason and got options extended, I think.

I would expect it to be a routine clause in youth player contracts when they're on edge of the first team.

Minimises risk of losing someone you want, especially cheap, but limits your exposure to being stuck for four years with once promising, now lame duck players.

Which i felt was an issue with some of our youth not too long ago.

Saying that, £9m is still clearly misleading. Anything like that would be bound to include most of it only being paid after x PL appearances or starts.

Oh it won't be 9m up front but it all depends on if the add ons are "easy" or "hard" as to how good the deal really is.

So it might be say 4m up front, 1m once he makes his debut, another 1m if he plays in the CL, 1m once he makes 20 apps etc, etc...

[Snowflake Royal]

I don't think the club talks about these clauses for their younger players. The only one I think we knew about was Perreira, yet Ehibhatiomhan; Wareham; Craig and Dorsett also all had their clauses triggered in addition to Azeez. We also triggered one year extensions for five of the U21s, none of whom we knew had clauses.

It's possible players we sold in January, who would've been out of contract in the summer, also had a one year extension - Vickers and Abbey most pertinently. That could've allowed us to get more money for them than we otherwise would have.

Yeah it's a good point, I think there's heaps more examples... weren't Abrefa and Anderson also thought to be ooc in preseason and got options extended, I think.

I would expect it to be a routine clause in youth player contracts when they're on edge of the first team.

Minimises risk of losing someone you want, especially cheap, but limits your exposure to being stuck for four years with once promising, now lame duck players.

Which i felt was an issue with some of our youth not too long ago.

Saying that, £9m is still clearly misleading. Anything like that would be bound to include most of it only being paid after x PL appearances or starts.

Oh it won't be 9m up front but it all depends on if the add ons are "easy" or "hard" as to how good the deal really is.

So it might be say 4m up front, 1m once he makes his debut, another 1m if he plays in the CL, 1m once he makes 20 apps etc, etc...

Personally, I doubt it would be more than £2m upfront. Probably less.

I'd stage it say something like:

£1.5m
£1m on debut
£4m on 10 PL starts
£2.5m on CL start