Summer Rebuild

[paddy20]

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

[Coppelled_Streets]

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

You seem to be forgetting fairly significant signing on fees as well. There is no such thing as a free transfer at this level.

[winchester_royal]

And he also seems to be forgetting that Sa cost c. £1m

And he also seems to be forgetting that we'll have made a juicy loss last season which will need to have been covered.

[Woodcote Royal]

S

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

All this good new has got the wrist slitters all suicidal "Single to Dignitas"

[paddy20]

S

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

All this good new has got the wrist slitters all suicidal "Single to Dignitas"

Just saying don't get carried away. £1.25m plus signing on fees is not a serious attempt to get in play-offs. However if we sign another striker and midfielder for about 5m then that is!

[paddy20]

S

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

All this good new has got the wrist slitters all suicidal "Single to Dignitas"

Just saying don't get carried away. £1.25m plus signing on fees is not a serious attempt to get in play-offs. However if we sign another striker and midfielder for about 5m then that is!

Also days of signing on fees unless you are a top player have long gone.

[Extended-Phenotype]

People forget there are Touching Fees. They are quite reasonable for 'not gay' areas, but can get quite extortionate for 'gay' areas - like the areola or the balloon-knot.

[West Stand Man]

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

Yes, you would make a great businessman. It clearly makes sense to pay a transfer fee rather than get the player that you want without being charged a fee. After all, only players bought for a fee are any good.

[Woodcote Royal]

S

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

All this good new has got the wrist slitters all suicidal "Single to Dignitas"

Just saying don't get carried away. £1.25m plus signing on fees is not a serious attempt to get in play-offs. However if we sign another striker and midfielder for about 5m then that is!

So, how many strikers did we pay £5m for in the team that got 106pts and finished 8th in the top the following season

To suggest that it takes this kind of outlay to make a serious assault on the playoffs is nonsense. If that was the case, any team without parachute payments shouldn't bother trying.

Were it not for that parachute money and the generosity of our new owners, by the time we've paid Pog's wages the rest of the squad would be lucky to get a half time orange!

Some of you live in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

[Ian Royal]

S

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

All this good new has got the wrist slitters all suicidal "Single to Dignitas"

Just saying don't get carried away. £1.25m plus signing on fees is not a serious attempt to get in play-offs. However if we sign another striker and midfielder for about 5m then that is!

£5m more? £6.5m in transfer fees for a championship club? That's crazy money.

And you're missing the point that fees aren't the major issue, it's wages. The amount you pay in fees is really not important. All it tells you is how much in contract the player was.

[genome]

So, Nigel Howe confirms we still want both Donaldson and Beric - two more strikers, on top of Sa.

Saucy

http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/reading-fc-transfers-beric-donaldson-9601793

No, not source. I was going for the innuendo.

[RoyallyFcuked]

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

Just saying don't get carried away. £1.25m plus signing on fees is not a serious attempt to get in play-offs. However if we sign another striker and midfielder for about 5m then that is!

So, how many strikers did we pay £5m for in the team that got 106pts and finished 8th in the top the following season

To suggest that it takes this kind of outlay to make a serious assault on the playoffs is nonsense. If that was the case, any team without parachute payments shouldn't bother trying.

Were it not for that parachute money and the generosity of our new owners, by the time we've paid Pog's wages the rest of the squad would be lucky to get a half time orange!

Some of you live in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

You have a point, you don't need to spend stupid money to get promoted to the PL, we have proved that twice. But things are different now compared to 10 years ago when we stormed to the title, even 3 years ago when we also went up.

A lot depends on the manager of course, we will see if we have the right one (I think we do), but a big part of it is about confidence and going on a run, and winning is obviously essential to breed confidence. But I do think you need to spend more now, there are plenty of teams that spend big and don't even go up. Don't get me wrong you don't have to spend stupid money, but if we are hoping to sneak a promotion on shoestring budget again we might be waiting a while.

[Ian Royal]

People were saying things are different now 10 years ago. They said the same 5 years ago. Burnley have done it since us to.

There's always room for a carefully put together greatr than the sum of its parts to succeed and get promoted. Not easy though.

[Royal Rother]

But I do think you need to spend more now, there are plenty of teams that spend big and don't even go up. Don't get me wrong you don't have to spend stupid money, but if we are hoping to sneak a promotion on shoestring budget again we might be waiting a while.

A. Spend £5m on a player on a 4 year contract and £25k pw = £10.2m outlay.

B. Or get a player on a freebie because he's run his contract down for a signing on fee of £1m and £30k pw for 4 years = £7.24m outlay.

They might be exactly the same player effectively but because the latter ran his contract down he gets paid more and the buying club gets a better deal.

It's really not all about transfer fees these days.

Put it another way - If we'd bought Quinn and McShane last season they would have commanded transfer fees. But they'd have been the same player we've got now...

[Nameless]

But for a certain sort of fan the ONLY measure of a club's 'ambition' is how much they shell out in transfer fees.

When the reported fees aren't usually what was actually paid anyway, it's a bizarre obsession.

[Extended-Phenotype]

It is an obsession, yes - but it has roots. In general (not always, obvs) players on frees aren't as 'good' as players with contracts, and if a club is competing for the services of a contracted player who costs X amount of money (and still requiring wages) it shows they are more up for sticking their hands in their pockets, which means they are looking for more of a return (hence 'ambition'). It's a crude way of looking at it but not without justification.

Clubs spending more money is a sign of intent, whereas clubs being a bit tighter can be a sign they just want to make do. That's not to say a tighter approach will always see less success but some players are in contract and cost more money for a reason.

[YateleyRoyal]

All this good new has got the wrist slitters all suicidal "Single to Dignitas"

Just saying don't get carried away. £1.25m plus signing on fees is not a serious attempt to get in play-offs. However if we sign another striker and midfielder for about 5m then that is!

Also days of signing on fees unless you are a top player have long gone.

Where's your evidence of this?

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

Also days of signing on fees unless you are a top player have long gone.

Where's your evidence of this?

Quite.

If anything, I would say that post-Bosman, this had become a widespread, standard practice.

[paddy20]

Also days of signing on fees unless you are a top player have long gone.

Where's your evidence of this?

Quite.

If anything, I would say that post-Bosman, this had become a widespread, standard practice.

If you speak with players they laugh at the idea of signing on fees nowadays, unless you are a top player

[paddy20]

Just thinking before we get too excited, there has been little investment in players so far other than £250k for Bond. All the others were frees and its just wages so far. Its easy to do that and walk off as we know from the past. With the majority shareholder suggesting that if planning isn't granted for the new project they can just walk away, and us not meeting valuations on the two new targets that will require transfer fees we should be careful not to get too carried away. Just saying!

Yes, you would make a great businessman. It clearly makes sense to pay a transfer fee rather than get the player that you want without being charged a fee. After all, only players bought for a fee are any good.

Missing the point. Not saying it isn't a good idea just that there is little new investment. Wages are only relevant further down the line and if the new boys make a quick exit it has little effect on them. I'm playing devils advocate a bit here as personally I think its looking good but I also thought that when the Russians took over