6.7 million profit

[Baines]

I think the next 2 years will show just how right we've got things as many clubs experience dramatic effects of the recession.

It's a good point. I'm surprised that you haven't mentioned it before...

[Wycombe Royal]

£6.7m profit - is that all?

He is putting his Degas sculpture up for auction and is expected to make a £7m profit!!!

[hughsies no.1]

Ok so the start of the summer has been positive in my opinion. Rodgers coming in is great, he has shown the passion/ motivation / ambition that reading fans have craved when the thought of the new season is great. Shunt says he wants to go so even better news

However:

this is our last season with the parachute payments yet where told we have to sell to balance the books and make 11 million? yet when coppell was asked about the financial position of the club after the play offs he stated 'there is no credit crunch at reading fc'. so where has all the money from parachute payments gone from last season, from the departures of shorey/ kitson considering we spent practically nothing on players. Dont get me wrong the academy boys will be out in force next season but surely we need to be out in the market purchasing players that will drive us forward. if marek / doyle or bikey go then they will be a huge loss and to make the ''11 mil to balance the books'' surely some of them will have to go.

Where is the money going/ gone?

[Ian Royal]

Into our debts. Into infrastructure. Into increased transfer spending. Into increased wage budgets.

It's not complex. 2 years of £6m profit, does not offset 15 years at £2-5m loss each year.

[Royalee]

Media centre, new training ground, dome, Stephen 'I'm a moneygrabbing pikey' Hunt's pockets.

[brendywendy]

Into our debts. Into infrastructure. Into increased transfer spending. Into increased wage budgets.

It's not complex. 2 years of £6m profit, does not offset 15 years at £2-5m loss each year.

+1

'greed

I concur.

[Deathy]

Into our debts. Into infrastructure. Into increased transfer spending. Into increased wage budgets.

It's not complex. 2 years of £6m profit, does not offset 15 years at £2-5m loss each year.

TROFLansfeROFL spending!

[Thaumagurist*]

Perhaps we're just being prudent what with the parachute payments coming to an end next year, so we'd want the big earners off the wage bill. We probably could still spend a fair amount on new players and ensure that they would be on a lower wage packet. For example, sell for £10m and spend something like £3m.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

It's this whole "£11m to balance the books" that is the concern. As I posted elsewhere, since being in the prem, we have generated £45m of income in profits, player sales and parachute payments. Yes, as Ian mentions we have made losses, but to point to infrastructure as a separate issue is surely double counting as these would have been accounted for in those figures. Perhaps JM wants all his money back, who knows? But that kind of statement hardly inspires the masses.

But perhaps there is another way to interpret it. BR has come in, and has his own ideas, of which playing staff has to be a major factor. Over his contract term, the board has calculated that it will cost roughly £11m to implement. They all agree that's fine, go ahead, but it has to be done by generating your own cash, basically saying "don't think of asking for money we already have".

The statement may also be the stalwart smokescreen of never publicly saying how much we plan to spend.

All this is pure speculation, but fun nonetheless

[Deathy]

Perhaps we're just being prudent what with the parachute payments coming to an end next year, so we'd want the big earners off the wage bill. We probably could still spend a fair amount on new players and ensure that they would be on a lower wage packet. For example, sell for £10m and spend something like £3m.

Read the reports Spacey!

We must make £11m just to balance the books.

Bringing players in will require selling players too. We wont surely make £11m and balance the books, and then say "here's £2m, even though we now can't balance the fecking books".

[Forbury Lion]

What we need is for a team of apprentice contestant wannabees to band together and present to Sir John a plan to market Reading as a holiday destination with the Madejski Hotel as the major tourist hotel.

Perhaps rebrand it Reading as in books and target the librarian market. They'd be right at home in the stadium.

[Thaumagurist*]

Perhaps we're just being prudent what with the parachute payments coming to an end next year, so we'd want the big earners off the wage bill. We probably could still spend a fair amount on new players and ensure that they would be on a lower wage packet. For example, sell for £10m and spend something like £3m.

Read the reports Spacey!

We must make £11m just to balance the books.

Bringing players in will require selling players too. We wont surely make £11m and balance the books, and then say "here's £2m, even though we now can't balance the fecking books".

Hold on a minute, telephone box abuser, consider where the "balance the books" quote came from. Did Hammond say directly that we needed to do that? Here's the quote:

Royals’ new boss has been told he must wheel and deal in the transfer market and I understand the 36-year-old has to sell players up to the value of £11million to balance the books.

That is the speculation that the Evening Post have been printing. Hammond merely said:

Reading director of football Nick Hammond refused to go into details, but said: “It is right to say players will have to be sold.

“The manager is aware of the situation he has come into. If we want to buy players this summer there will have to be trading take place. There is no doubt about that."

He does not say if we actually need to balance the books, just that we need to sell the players. The figure, £11m, is a bit of speculation on the Evening Post's part, it probably isn't accurate.

[Deathy]

Give me strength.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

Hold on a minute, telephone box abuser,

Spacey - how about once in your life you try and go a whole day on here without reducing yourself to name calling to make a point.

Puerile at best

[Tilehurst Mike]

Yes, and probably a few thousand others who have yet to renew their season tickets. What exactly are the clubs ambitions next season, to get promoted, reach the play offs, 'consolidate' or simply 'balance the books'? I am looking forward to seeing some of the youngsters progress but one musn't lose sight of the fact that most of them were on loan to Div1/2 sides last season. If Shunt, Doyle and maybe Bikey go they will need to be replaced and that will cost money. Not forgetting the fact that we have 'lost' strikers like Lita and Kitson.

I accept the fact that the club needs to be careful with its financial infrastructure but they hardly splashed put when they were in the Premiership and I do wonder where all the money has gone. If the likes of Stoke, Hull and Wigan can operate with substantially higher transfer kitties, I do wonder whether there is something not quite right with our policy as a couple of quality signings would not go amiss to lift spirits a bit.

[brendywendy]

we have generated £45m of income in profits, player sales and parachute payments. Yes, as Ian mentions we have made losses,

erm

business 101 for you sir.

[Sun Tzu]

I accept the fact that the club needs to be careful with its financial infrastructure but they hardly splashed put when they were in the Premiership and I do wonder where all the money has gone. If the likes of Stoke, Hull and Wigan can operate with substantially higher transfer kitties, I do wonder whether there is something not quite right with our policy as a couple of quality signings would not go amiss to lift spirits a bit.

Just because one club operates in a particular way doesn;t really have much bearing on how another operates.

The three clubs you mention have some significant differences to ours. Hull have a big new ground which was paid for by their local council - so unlike us they have no (or very low) debts around that and probably next to no running costs (possibly offset by low non football income although I have no idea if this is the case). Wigan have a football mad chairman who has been happy to put large sums into the club. Their transfer dealings over the years have borne no relation to what they could afford but their chairman was willing and able to underwrite it. Stoke also have a very wealthy backer who has made large sums available.

We don't have the option of following their strategies. We have to operate within our own resources. And JM has always been clear that he wasn't the type of owner that would do a Whelan / Walker.


I'd agree that some quality signings are required, but we've made plenty of those in the past without spending a lot on them. I'd hope the desire is for good players, rather than headline grabbing spending. Too often we seem obsessed with money rather than results !

[Row Z Royal]

we have generated £45m of income in profits, player sales and parachute payments. Yes, as Ian mentions we have made losses,

erm

business 101 for you sir.

'greed.

Spacey, Jay: piss off.

Why everyone is shocked at this so-called penny-pinching by RFC, I don't know. The money is there but we have a (vital and admirable) philosophy of frugality. Why spend more than you need to spend when the results appear to be much the same?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Ronaldo and Kaka at the club, but at what expense? Our foray into the Premier League has assured our future as a football club for a few more years, giving us the base to consolidate and push on again...but not risk the club's stability by gambling on over-priced and over-paid no-hopers.

Have patience, embrace the big picture and realise that once the bubble bursts, millions of football fans will be devastated at the losses by their clubs. You, me and all the other Reading fans will not be among them because we will be secure and stable.

[IMAMATEOFJOVSKY]

we have generated £45m of income in profits, player sales and parachute payments. Yes, as Ian mentions we have made losses,

erm

business 101 for you sir.

'greed.

Spacey, Jay: piss off.

Why everyone is shocked at this so-called penny-pinching by RFC, I don't know. The money is there but we have a (vital and admirable) philosophy of frugality. Why spend more than you need to spend when the results appear to be much the same?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Ronaldo and Kaka at the club, but at what expense? Our foray into the Premier League has assured our future as a football club for a few more years, giving us the base to consolidate and push on again...but not risk the club's stability by gambling on over-priced and over-paid no-hopers.

Have patience, embrace the big picture and realise that once the bubble bursts, millions of football fans will be devastated at the losses by their clubs. You, me and all the other Reading fans will not be among them because we will be secure and stable.

I dont think anyone is expecting high profile players to roll into the club - but I do think that the sounds coming out from club about tightness of budgets is a real negative to fans - god, we arent even into the transfer window and the club are basically saying there's very little money around and we need to sell - what sort of positive is that to a club and its supporters, whose chairman wants premier league football on a shoestring.

3 seasons ago we were 8th best team in country, 2 seasons ago we were 18th, last season we were 24th -and unless we invest, and replace the crown jewels that will leave the club (Doyle and Bikey) we will continue to fall off the pace.

[Row Z Royal]

I refer you to my final paragraph.