Hob Nob Anyone?

Many people bandy this number about as if it's a cast iron certainty that we will have to sell to this number before we can buy. Here's my take on where that figure came from. We had 11m as parachute payments for last year and this year and we needed those payments to balance the books. Planning ahead, if we're in the Championship next year, we'll either need a similar amount to come from somewhere over and above regular turnover, ore we'll have to drastically cut the wage bill. If you write for the EP, that adds up to the headline remark that we now need to sell 11m worth of players.

We do need to make contingency plans for a Championship future. For what it's worth, I think the club's strategy will fall between balancing the books at Championship levels and mortgaging the farm in a desperate attempt at immediate promotion. So we won't sell 11m in players (as though we could) and we will buy at least one or two.

So anyone got a different spin on this?

I agree with you, Arch, but I wonder if the likes of Jay are going to pay any attention to what you're saying.

I'm all for being careful in order to preserve the long term future of the club and would happily sell Hunt and Harper to raise sufficient funds whilst bringing in some cheaper replacements like Smith, Cork, Adam and some loanees. These sorts of players will also likely be on far lower wages than the players we should hopefully get rid of, so that's another plus. It might be wise to start promoting reserve games and bringing in other forms of revenue like we used to before we were in the Premiership. I don't think we have anything to worry about though as I can see us going up this coming season.

Sensible post and something I've been wondering.

We will probably get around £11m for Hunt, Doyle and Bikey and I'd be surprised if most of that doesn't go to Rodgers for use in the transfer market. This is perhaps another source for this figure with the conclusion being leapt to that this will be all there is.

We've always been a very sensible club and all the players had relegation clauses on their contracts regarding wages. Regardless of who you are, if we're in the Championship, you should be getting Champiosnhip wages with a provision for an increase if/when we get promoted. I'm sure that's how we'll approach any future contracts.

As for other sources of revenue, nothing beats a full stadium. The club could probably do with a few more incentives for people to come along (kid for a quid, discount on bulk ticket purchases, etc)

No transfer fees are paid in one lump sum these days, so don't go thinking about £11m in one go. It'd be £11m over 3 or even 4 years.

The whole background to this is much more about getting rid of high earners than getting money in - but presented that way would be mis-understood by many and would make the players concerned even greater targets of abuse.

We've already got rid of Marcus, Murty and Lita whose combined wage bill must have equalled a million or two a year surely.

Dirk Gently wrote:No transfer fees are paid in one lump sum these days, so don't go thinking about £11m in one go. It'd be £11m over 3 or even 4 years.

The whole background to this is much more about getting rid of high earners than getting money in - but presented that way would be mis-understood by many and would make the players concerned even greater targets of abuse.

No but you can factor them in to any deal. Plus it works both ways, we might only get the money in part payments but equally we'd be paying out in part as well.

I think everyone agrees with need to get rid of high earners but I think people exaggerate the problem at Reading. Most of the top earners signed new deals fairly recently which will give easily activated and mutually beneficial get out clauses and like I said, most, if not all are only a reduced wage from the Premiership years

Y21_Royal wrote:

Dirk Gently wrote:No transfer fees are paid in one lump sum these days, so don't go thinking about £11m in one go. It'd be £11m over 3 or even 4 years.

The whole background to this is much more about getting rid of high earners than getting money in - but presented that way would be mis-understood by many and would make the players concerned even greater targets of abuse.

No but you can factor them in to any deal. Plus it works both ways, we might only get the money in part payments but equally we'd be paying out in part as well.

I think everyone agrees with need to get rid of high earners but I think people exaggerate the problem at Reading. Most of the top earners signed new deals fairly recently which will give easily activated and mutually beneficial get out clauses and like I said, most, if not all are only a reduced wage from the Premiership years

True - and I think a lot of this is more about PR and public perception than the actual situation.... but don't forget that the gap between PL and CCC wages is so hugh that a reduced wage from the Premiership years is still much higher than average for the CCC.

Dirk Gently wrote:but don't forget that the gap between PL and CCC wages is so hugh

Who's Hugh?

Thaumagurist* wrote:

Dirk Gently wrote:but don't forget that the gap between PL and CCC wages is so hugh

Who's Hugh?

Feckin' spollchecker!

My god, a thread about transfer amounts without it descending into idiocy about us spending nothing, lining SJM's pockets and signing no new players.

Oh, Jay still hasn't responded yet...

Ian Royal wrote:My god, a thread about transfer amounts without it descending into idiocy about us spending nothing, lining SJM's pockets and signing no new players.

Oh, Jay still hasn't responded yet...

I like pre-season Ian Royal a lot more than Coppell reign Ian Royal.

Ian has always been mostly positive though, supporting the team and the manager.

How is it all of a sudden that the plans laid down by the club are sensible, yet when Coppell was here he was oft asked to go splash the cash??

Like many I was disappointed that we did not buy some quality when in the Prem, but it has been shown it does not really work, i would say £3m is about the top we will pay for any player should we go back up, and not much more than £1.5 at this level.

The 17 Bus wrote:Ian has always been mostly positive though, supporting the team and the manager.

How is it all of a sudden that the plans laid down by the club are sensible, yet when Coppell was here he was oft asked to go splash the cash??

Like many I was disappointed that we did not buy some quality when in the Prem, but it has been shown it does not really work, i would say £3m is about the top we will pay for any player should we go back up, and not much more than £1.5 at this level.

He wasn't asked to splash the cash, he was asked to bring in a few players to improve the side, which he had the funds to do - instead he bought crap and then refused to strengthen the squad every transfer window just because we'd fluked a lucky win. He openly admitted he had to funds to bring in players but then said he didn't want to.