by andrew1957 » 01 Oct 2009 19:14
by brendywendy » 01 Oct 2009 19:20
by No Hoops » 01 Oct 2009 19:24
brendywendy do you mean the average players who managed to somehow fluke 106 points record breaking championship total, followed by 8th place in the prem?
i have no idea why such rubbish players would be worth paying what ammounts to low to average prem wages.
by PEARCEY » 01 Oct 2009 19:27
brendywendy do you mean the average players who managed to somehow fluke 106 points record breaking championship total, followed by 8th place in the prem?
i have no idea why such rubbish players would be worth paying what ammounts to low to average prem wages.
by Arnie_Pie » 01 Oct 2009 19:28
by Ian Royal » 01 Oct 2009 19:30
by Tony Le Mesmer » 01 Oct 2009 19:31
by brendywendy » 01 Oct 2009 19:32
PEARCEYbrendywendy do you mean the average players who managed to somehow fluke 106 points record breaking championship total, followed by 8th place in the prem?
i have no idea why such rubbish players would be worth paying what ammounts to low to average prem wages.
Can't agree Brenders. I'm with Andrew on this and shocked at the money spent on "wages".
It does, perhaps illustrate why there was a need for the fire-sale this summer. I have to say given the figures I now more readily accept the clubs transfer activity. It does leave me scratching my head though when I see the likes of Stoke (similar sized club) spending so much more on bringing in players than we ever did.
by Mid Sussex Royal » 01 Oct 2009 19:33
by FiNeRaIn » 01 Oct 2009 19:34
Arnie_Pie Exactly what the sensible amongst us have been saying all along.
by 1871royals » 01 Oct 2009 19:34
by andrew1957 » 01 Oct 2009 19:34
brendywendy do you mean the average players who managed to somehow fluke 106 points record breaking championship total, followed by 8th place in the prem?
i have no idea why such rubbish players would be worth paying what amounts to low to average prem wages.
massive LOLs at those who believed the tabloid headline figures of prem league being worth 60-100 million a season-forgetting it included 3 seasons of parachute money etc
and massive LOLs at all those who insisted in underhand money grabbing by madejski, clawing back the money loaned, or using the club finances to pay for statues
i await the flood of apologies/conspiracy theories about dodgy accounting
...........................
by Ian Royal » 01 Oct 2009 19:34
Tony Le Mesmer A couple of points/questions:
What did we spend a NET £10.6m on in transfers?
It says we lost £6.25m last year. But it doesnt mention the sale of Kitson/Shorey/Sonko.
by Baines » 01 Oct 2009 19:34
by Ian Royal » 01 Oct 2009 19:36
andrew1957brendywendy do you mean the average players who managed to somehow fluke 106 points record breaking championship total, followed by 8th place in the prem?
i have no idea why such rubbish players would be worth paying what amounts to low to average prem wages.
massive LOLs at those who believed the tabloid headline figures of prem league being worth 60-100 million a season-forgetting it included 3 seasons of parachute money etc
and massive LOLs at all those who insisted in underhand money grabbing by madejski, clawing back the money loaned, or using the club finances to pay for statues
i await the flood of apologies/conspiracy theories about dodgy accounting
...........................
You are entitled to your views but what I don't understand is why we paid something like £10M in wages in 2005/6 and then paid 30M per annum in wages to broadly the same players (with a few additions) in the PL. It has always seemed a bit mad to me that if a player receives say 500K per annum in the Championship that this immediately goes up massively as soon as they reach the PL - even though they are under a contract. Personally I think the wages should stay the same and say a 500K bonus should be paid each year you survive in the PL. That way the club's finances remain stable and the players are incentivised for success.
by Arnie_Pie » 01 Oct 2009 19:36
FiNeRaInArnie_Pie Exactly what the sensible amongst us have been saying all along.
that the club wasted in excess of 50 million on unproven players wages from the championship? Yep, all makes sense. This puts to bed all those comments suggesting we were " well run". What complete foolishness. Looks like the club believed the media hype and went waving the cheque book at the players willy nilly.
by Tony Le Mesmer » 01 Oct 2009 19:36
Mid Sussex Royal What about gate money, sponsorship etc etc?
by Royalee » 01 Oct 2009 19:37
andrew1957 From the OS - at last the financial statement.
It all makes sense apart from the massive PL wage bill. Why on earth were we paying so much in wages to average players. It does make you wonder how well run the club really is.
http://www.readingfc.co.uk/page/NewsDet ... 11,00.html
by Ian Royal » 01 Oct 2009 19:38
Tony Le MesmerMid Sussex Royal What about gate money, sponsorship etc etc?
It says taking into account all other income.
Id love to know what £7.4m on 'infrastructure' represents.
by Arnie_Pie » 01 Oct 2009 19:38
Tony Le MesmerMid Sussex Royal What about gate money, sponsorship etc etc?
It says taking into account all other income.
Id love to know what £7.4m on 'infrastructure' represents.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 130 guests