Thai owners

[Forbury Lion]

Before Anton and the Thai's came along there were a number of fans on this site calling Sir John a tightwad for not investing in the club and that he should step down and let someone else take over.

Those fans have been awfully quiet since the Anton bubble burst.

[Green]

I think they're still posting on the team board TBF

[MoorgateRoyal]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Also, just because the club hasn't said much about transfers, it doesn't mean that we haven't been working on them. Should we pay over the odds for a player, just for the sake of making a signing? There may be money available, but not to spunk up the wall on wages for someone demanding more than they're worth (in the club's opinion). Not every negotiation ends in a signing, and the club aren't going to publicly announce our interest in every player we speak to.

FFP probably comes into it too and we're not getting as much in parachute payments as the last two seasons, so they will need to budget for that. Not every single penny a club makes can be used for transfers.

The situation as I see it is that we were mismanaged before by Anton, so the Thais will need to manage us carefully so we don't have the same situation again. This means not much outlay on transfers, and more of a focus on developing our Academy and the players that will come through it. We will also need to get rid of high earners, where possible, as popular as they may be with the fans. We can't spend too many years paying players Premier League wages when our income can't sustain it. At the moment we are in a transitional period which all clubs go through at some point, to a greater or lesser extent.

We don't really know if the Thais are doing what's in the club's best interests or their own, and whether what is happening now is them doing things properly or shafting us quietly. It may take some time for us to find out what the case is, so until it becomes clear, it's hard to pass judgement.

[Samrfc01]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Also, just because the club hasn't said much about transfers, it doesn't mean that we haven't been working on them. Should we pay over the odds for a player, just for the sake of making a signing? There may be money available, but not to spunk up the wall on wages for someone demanding more than they're worth (in the club's opinion). Not every negotiation ends in a signing, and the club aren't going to publicly announce our interest in every player we speak to.

FFP probably comes into it too and we're not getting as much in parachute payments as the last two seasons, so they will need to budget for that. Not every single penny a club makes can be used for transfers.

The situation as I see it is that we were mismanaged before by Anton, so the Thais will need to manage us carefully so we don't have the same situation again. This means not much outlay on transfers, and more of a focus on developing our Academy and the players that will come through it. We will also need to get rid of high earners, where possible, as popular as they may be with the fans. We can't spend too many years paying players Premier League wages when our income can't sustain it. At the moment we are in a transitional period which all clubs go through at some point, to a greater or lesser extent.

We don't really know if the Thais are doing what's in the club's best interests or their own, and whether what is happening now is them doing things properly or shafting us quietly. It may take some time for us to find out what the case is, so until it becomes clear, it's hard to pass judgement.

How dare you post something so sensible!

That sort of thing is forbidden around here where everyhting is all doom and gloom.

[Coppelled_Streets]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Don't forget Nigel Howe's interview some months ago where he said he has a lot of say and sway now, more so than when SJM ran the club - this is not a good thing!

[elman]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Also, just because the club hasn't said much about transfers, it doesn't mean that we haven't been working on them. Should we pay over the odds for a player, just for the sake of making a signing? There may be money available, but not to spunk up the wall on wages for someone demanding more than they're worth (in the club's opinion). Not every negotiation ends in a signing, and the club aren't going to publicly announce our interest in every player we speak to.

FFP probably comes into it too and we're not getting as much in parachute payments as the last two seasons, so they will need to budget for that. Not every single penny a club makes can be used for transfers.

The situation as I see it is that we were mismanaged before by Anton, so the Thais will need to manage us carefully so we don't have the same situation again. This means not much outlay on transfers, and more of a focus on developing our Academy and the players that will come through it. We will also need to get rid of high earners, where possible, as popular as they may be with the fans. We can't spend too many years paying players Premier League wages when our income can't sustain it. At the moment we are in a transitional period which all clubs go through at some point, to a greater or lesser extent.

We don't really know if the Thais are doing what's in the club's best interests or their own, and whether what is happening now is them doing things properly or shafting us quietly. It may take some time for us to find out what the case is, so until it becomes clear, it's hard to pass judgement.

At least two of us think this to sensible for Hob Nob

[MoorgateRoyal]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Don't forget Nigel Howe's interview some months ago where he said he has a lot of say and sway now, more so than when SJM ran the club - this is not a good thing!

I don't know enough about Nigel Howe to really comment on him. I know he's been here a long time, during our most successful years too, so the Thais may be looking to him for some guidance on the sort of things they haven't got much experience of.

[Royalwaster]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Also, just because the club hasn't said much about transfers, it doesn't mean that we haven't been working on them. Should we pay over the odds for a player, just for the sake of making a signing? There may be money available, but not to spunk up the wall on wages for someone demanding more than they're worth (in the club's opinion). Not every negotiation ends in a signing, and the club aren't going to publicly announce our interest in every player we speak to.

FFP probably comes into it too and we're not getting as much in parachute payments as the last two seasons, so they will need to budget for that. Not every single penny a club makes can be used for transfers.

The situation as I see it is that we were mismanaged before by Anton, so the Thais will need to manage us carefully so we don't have the same situation again. This means not much outlay on transfers, and more of a focus on developing our Academy and the players that will come through it. We will also need to get rid of high earners, where possible, as popular as they may be with the fans. We can't spend too many years paying players Premier League wages when our income can't sustain it. At the moment we are in a transitional period which all clubs go through at some point, to a greater or lesser extent.

We don't really know if the Thais are doing what's in the club's best interests or their own, and whether what is happening now is them doing things properly or shafting us quietly. It may take some time for us to find out what the case is, so until it becomes clear, it's hard to pass judgement.

At least two of us think this to sensible for Hob Nob

But surely a situation in which a manager such as SC - who is not in my book an obvious media whore - comes out and says he doesn't have a transfer budget at this stage of time, is a serious issue? I am definitely not one asking us to splurge cash on players - but we clearly need some flexibility to sign some players on frees to replace those that have left? Or do you think even without any signings we've got a good chance of doing well in this league?

[MoorgateRoyal]

Has anyone considered the possibility that these people have never owned a football club before, and are still getting used to the process of dealing with agents, familiarising themselves with contractual laws and procedures, and just generally doing a lot of this stuff for the first time?

Also, just because the club hasn't said much about transfers, it doesn't mean that we haven't been working on them. Should we pay over the odds for a player, just for the sake of making a signing? There may be money available, but not to spunk up the wall on wages for someone demanding more than they're worth (in the club's opinion). Not every negotiation ends in a signing, and the club aren't going to publicly announce our interest in every player we speak to.

FFP probably comes into it too and we're not getting as much in parachute payments as the last two seasons, so they will need to budget for that. Not every single penny a club makes can be used for transfers.

The situation as I see it is that we were mismanaged before by Anton, so the Thais will need to manage us carefully so we don't have the same situation again. This means not much outlay on transfers, and more of a focus on developing our Academy and the players that will come through it. We will also need to get rid of high earners, where possible, as popular as they may be with the fans. We can't spend too many years paying players Premier League wages when our income can't sustain it. At the moment we are in a transitional period which all clubs go through at some point, to a greater or lesser extent.

We don't really know if the Thais are doing what's in the club's best interests or their own, and whether what is happening now is them doing things properly or shafting us quietly. It may take some time for us to find out what the case is, so until it becomes clear, it's hard to pass judgement.

At least two of us think this to sensible for Hob Nob

But surely a situation in which a manager such as SC - who is not in my book an obvious media whore - comes out and says he doesn't have a transfer budget at this stage of time, is a serious issue? I am definitely not one asking us to splurge cash on players - but we clearly need some flexibility to sign some players on frees to replace those that have left? Or do you think even without any signings we've got a good chance of doing well in this league?

It may be that the budget is flexible and not set in stone, as it were, until we identify more players, or more become available, or it might just be a case of making money available when it is needed. That may be the case, or it may be the case that the Thais have decided we won't get a budget. Or, possibly, they have decided to base the budget on what has been identified by the scouts and management. We don't really know what the intentions are, as those conversations aren't likely to be made public (intentionally anyway).

Of course we need to make signings, but the players need to be within the club's valuations, they must be available, and they have to be willing to come. It's quite hard to identify players who meet all the criteria.

[WoodleyRoyal]

or... by saying that we have no budget decided, actually means yes we do have a budget decided.... we just don't want to shout from the rooftop that we have money to spend. Clubs/players then won't hold us to ransom and may even take pity on us, hopefully picking up a few bargains along the way.

[Forbury Lion]

No budget decided could mean they know what players they need, but they have not worked out how much it's going to cost to get them but whatever it costs we will pay it as long as we are within the FFP rules.

Maybe Nicky Hammond is busy trying to offload players not good enough in order to obtain more funds/wage budget and that may increase the budget available for new signings.

[Ian Royal]

If deals to sign players on free transfers (I know these are not 'free' as such - but still a lot cheaper than those involving a fee and signing on fee) are really being held up by owners not giving green light - then we really have to be seriously worried!

Exactly my thoughts. Jury is still out on them, do we actually know that they paid the debt off?

I'm fairly confident they took it on themselves, rather than paying it off.

[Royal Lady]

Experience with football clubs or not - they surely know how to run a business and agree budgets in their business? They don't have to deal with agents - that's Hammond's job!

More like they saw the land and £££ signs flashed in front of their eyes.

[Royal Lady]

No budget decided could mean they know what players they need, but they have not worked out how much it's going to cost to get them but whatever it costs we will pay it as long as we are within the FFP rules.

Maybe Nicky Hammond is busy trying to offload players not good enough in order to obtain more funds/wage budget and that may increase the budget available for new signings.

What about the wages already saved on those that have left? Why haven't we signed Jamie Mackie?

[72 bus]

Why haven't we signed Jamie Mackie?

Could not afford his wages
He preferred QPR for obvious reasons

[blythspartan]

I can't help thinking that if the owners don't have money for new players then they would be bothering with the tour to Thailand etc.

I hope that after witnessing the FA cup semi final last season they saw the potential of the club. I always believed that a competitive Reading team in the Premiership would easily attract crowds of 30,000 +.

It looks like the next week or so will tell us a lot about their ambition for the club.

[tee peg]

I can't help thinking that if the owners don't have money for new players then they would be bothering with the tour to Thailand etc.

I hope that after witnessing the FA cup semi final last season they saw the potential of the club. I always believed that a competitive Reading team in the Premiership would easily attract crowds of 30,000 +.

It looks like the next week or so will tell us a lot about their ambition for the club.

Thai airways will be sponsoring the flights for the "tour".
That aside , it looks like there is no money available for signings.

[Royal Ginger]

I tend to believe what the media outlets are suggesting which is that it's all just a bit sluggish getting everything going with multiple owners. Agreeing an overall figure for a budget when everyone's got to put their hand in their pocket must be like trying to organise a night out with a mix of successful mates and mates who suck at life.

[WoodleyRoyal]

I tend to believe what the media outlets are suggesting which is that it's all just a bit sluggish getting everything going with multiple owners. Agreeing an overall figure for a budget when everyone's got to put their hand in their pocket must be like trying to organise a night out with a mix of successful mates and mates who suck at life.

Bad experience RG? Have you found that being ginger and smelling of piss has held you back in life?

[EverHopeful]

I tend to believe what the media outlets are suggesting which is that it's all just a bit sluggish getting everything going with multiple owners. Agreeing an overall figure for a budget when everyone's got to put their hand in their pocket must be like trying to organise a night out with a mix of successful mates and mates who suck at life.

I hope you are right and that is all it is........thing is no-one knows as nobody in power talks to the press. Probably quite understandable but when you hear various rumours about property deals, black holes etc, you do begin to wonder. Rumour, but rumour has had a habit of coming true over the last couple of years!!