TSI - The Promises, Policies & Progress Thread

[melonhead]

FACT

no point in just quoting spending.

you could buy ronaldo for 150 million, and sell the entire club to afford it, and saying "we spent 150 million" wouldnt really be telling you anything useful

[PistolPete]

FACT

no point in just quoting spending.

you could buy ronaldo for 150 million, and sell the entire club to afford it, and saying "we spent 150 million" wouldnt really be telling you anything useful

Just couldn't be arsed to say what you said - it just seemed too obvious - but it seems with the 'board owner' you have to.

[Cypry]

How likely our the FA to award little Reading category 1 academy status if they are lower-league? (I think the delay in rating is seeing if we stay up)

Utter rubbish...the delay is because we're being given more time to put the required facilities in place (or at least demonstrate capability to put them in place within an agreed timeframe)....

Any club can achieve CAT1, regardless of the division in which they're playing, as long as they have all of the pre-requisite facilities and meet the required spending and staffing ratios...

[Alexander Litvinenko]

How likely our the FA to award little Reading category 1 academy status if they are lower-league? (I think the delay in rating is seeing if we stay up)

Utter rubbish...the delay is because we're being given more time to put the required facilities in place (or at least demonstrate capability to put them in place within an agreed timeframe)....

Any club can achieve CAT1, regardless of the division in which they're playing, as long as they have all of the pre-requisite facilities and meet the required spending and staffing ratios...

And it's nothing to do with the FA, it's not their scheme. Accreditations are being performed by an external certification body.

[ZacNaloen]

Surprised I'd actually heard that rumour correct (assuming cypry is accurate). Heard that was the reason for the delay months ago.

[melonhead]

Given we announced 1 signing on Dec 31st and none since, I can't think we're planning much

yes. thats what it means

[Avon Royal]

FACT

no point in just quoting spending.

you could buy ronaldo for 150 million, and sell the entire club to afford it, and saying "we spent 150 million" wouldnt really be telling you anything useful

Just couldn't be arsed to say what you said - it just seemed too obvious - but it seems with the 'board owner' you have to.

You two are arguing yourselves round in a right old circle aren't you?

So let me get this straight:

When other clubs' spending is examined, we also have to take into account their transfer income.

HOWEVER

When it comes to Reading's spending, our transfer income is irrelevant as it has all been used to "run the club".


You can't have it both ways chaps!

[winchester_royal]

FACT

no point in just quoting spending.

you could buy ronaldo for 150 million, and sell the entire club to afford it, and saying "we spent 150 million" wouldnt really be telling you anything useful

Just couldn't be arsed to say what you said - it just seemed too obvious - but it seems with the 'board owner' you have to.

You two are arguing yourselves round in a right old circle aren't you?

So let me get this straight:

When other clubs' spending is examined, we also have to take into account their transfer income.

HOWEVER

When it comes to Reading's spending, our transfer income is irrelevant as it has all been used to "run the club".


You can't have it both ways chaps!

You really are dense.

We sold those players in the Championship, where we were operating at a loss, therefore the sales covered that loss. Just like what happened with Southampton and the sales of Bale/Ox/Walcott.

Swansea at the very least broke even before player sales, therefore didn't need to invest that money into 'running the club' and hence were able to spend it on new players.

[Avon Royal]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

[winchester_royal]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

No, that isn't the point.

At no point have Norwich or Swansea spent beyond their means. They have both survived because they had a competitive team that they had built over 2/3 years that was capable of winning games at this level.

Every club except for a choice few with huge financial backing run their clubs as a business. What makes you think you know better than the 99% of professional clubs that operate in football?

[SPARTA]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

You naively assume it's guaranteed we stay up if we spend x amount. If it was that easy then every club would do it. No, the best way forward is to invest in the infrastructure of the club, which is what we are doing, whilst at the same time investing a much larger amount in the playing staff than we could ever have imagined under SJM's ownership.

AZ has proved already with Roberts last season, that he is prepared to match and better that of the big boys in the Championship, so I'm very confident we will come back up if we do go down, even if it be 12 months or 36 months.

You can question the investment in the playing staff if you like, but lets be honest, we don't know how much was/is available, or who Brian wants. It's no good finger pointing or jumping the gun. Brian said himself in the fans forum in the summer that AZ had a list of big names he wanted, and BM and NH made it very clear that wasn't on! That suggests to me that there's no question about his ambition, or spending on the right players, but BM and NH have their own ideas what the right players are; which is only right - though it could be argued the signings they made weren't to date a success.

The side that went up last summer was very average and needed an awful lot of work. We went up too soon, and were never realistically going to be able to afford an overhaul. Taking a step back whilst continuing to improve the squad, and with the bigger budgets we're working too, we will continue to bring in top end players for Championship level, and when we come back up next time, IMO the squad will be much better equipped.

[Avon Royal]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

No, that isn't the point.

At no point have Norwich or Swansea spent beyond their means. They have both survived because they had a competitive team that they had built over 2/3 years that was capable of winning games at this level.

Every club except for a choice few with huge financial backing run their clubs as a business. What makes you think you know better than the 99% of professional clubs that operate in football?

Norwich's net spending since their return to the Prem is in the region of £17m............

Prudent clubs are always run as a business, but successful business know that you need to invest in the product in order to compete and move forward.

Our approach to this season was always going to end in relegation. We wasted a glorious chance to learn from the mistakes of our last relegation campaign. Maybe we'll get another chance, but it may not be for a while.....

[Avon Royal]

of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival

You naively assume it's guaranteed we stay up if we spend x amount.

Un-fucking-believable......................

[SPARTA]

Norwich's net spending since their return to the Prem is in the region of £17m............

Prudent clubs are always run as a business, but successful business know that you need to invest in the product in order to compete and move forward.

Is that transfer fees only? Reading have coughed up approx £6m so far this season in transfer fees, but then you have to account for the x million or two for Pogrebnyak's signing on fee, and the whopper agent fee, then look at Guthrie who would have also got a big signing fee, but less so, and again a sizeable agent fee, and then everyone else who has come in. It's very plausibly our spending to date is approx £12-13m so far, still not enough for the small minded though.

[Avon Royal]

Norwich's net spending since their return to the Prem is in the region of £17m............

Prudent clubs are always run as a business, but successful business know that you need to invest in the product in order to compete and move forward.

Is that transfer fees only? Reading have coughed up approx £6m so far this season in transfer fees, but then you have to account for the x million or two for Pogrebnyak's signing on fee, and the whopper agent fee, then look at Guthrie who would have also got a big signing fee, but less so, and again a sizeable agent fee, and then everyone else who has come in. It's very plausibly our spending to date is approx £12-13m so far, still not enough for the small minded though.

And none of Norwich's signings would have wanted wages, signing on fees or have agents to pay.

We fucked up our approach to this season. Best to just accept it, learn from it and move on.

[winchester_royal]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

No, that isn't the point.

At no point have Norwich or Swansea spent beyond their means. They have both survived because they had a competitive team that they had built over 2/3 years that was capable of winning games at this level.

Every club except for a choice few with huge financial backing run their clubs as a business. What makes you think you know better than the 99% of professional clubs that operate in football?

Norwich's net spending since their return to the Prem is in the region of £17m............

Prudent clubs are always run as a business, but successful business know that you need to invest in the product in order to compete and move forward.

Our approach to this season was always going to end in relegation. We wasted a glorious chance to learn from the mistakes of our last relegation campaign. Maybe we'll get another chance, but it may not be for a while.....

And ours in half a season is currently c.7m...

[Avon Royal]

Well let's see what it is after this window, although to be honest I think it's too late now and we'd be better saving the money for the Championship next year.

[melonhead]

FACT

no point in just quoting spending.

you could buy ronaldo for 150 million, and sell the entire club to afford it, and saying "we spent 150 million" wouldnt really be telling you anything useful

Just couldn't be arsed to say what you said - it just seemed too obvious - but it seems with the 'board owner' you have to.

You two are arguing yourselves round in a right old circle aren't you?

So let me get this straight:

When other clubs' spending is examined, we also have to take into account their transfer income.

HOWEVER

When it comes to Reading's spending, our transfer income is irrelevant as it has all been used to "run the club".


You can't have it both ways chaps!

i said all our income, not just transfer income has gone into running the club....... which runs at a loss due to not having enough fans & spending too much on wages/transfers
in response to the "where has all the money gone"

the above statement that looking only at spending, without taking into account player sales is a bit silly when assessing transfer budgets is absolutely right as seen in the example i gave in the quote.


those two things dont counter each other in anyway.

[melonhead]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

youre being a proper div.

but ignoring that

everything you say is irrelevant if you dont have the money to invest any more than we have

[Cypry]

BUT THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT!!!!!!

Two options:

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, have to sell players.

Oh, and you do realise that Southampton have spent around £28m since promotion don't you? Maybe the Bale/Ox money wasn't all used to "run the club" after all......

And yes, of course there is no guarantee that spending = survival, but all businesses need to take calculated risks in order to grow.

Do you guys really think you know better than the rest of the footballing world?

Problem is, there are four options....and now TSI are on-board, option 2 is a little different..

Invest in the team, stay up, make a profit, don't need to sell players

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, get relegated, run at a loss in the Championship, don't have to sell players as the wage bill is under control and TSI can cover a small loss, have a good crack at bouncing back with the bulk of the team established

Or

Invest in the team, get relegated, need to make massive cuts to the wage bill, sell best players, need to rebuild team, probably struggle in the Championship

Or

Try to do things on the cheap, stay up, wooohoooo - everyone's a winner...



Which spending strategy is the lowest risk? Investing, or doing things on the cheap...?