david in sweden Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 OK we've had this thread before. We know there are many dimensions to a transfer..agents fees, sell-on clauses, performance-related payments, other related to success criteria like play-off places or promotion. ...BUTwe paid (I think) £2 million for Rasiak. so can someone (in the know) please find out if we gave him away ...or what ? I'm sort of satisfied with a phrase like "..believed to be in the region of (fee.) OR .... £x ..rising to £y.... based on ...blah, blah). so just......HOW MUCH DID WE GET FOR THE RASIAK DEAL ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 does it matter..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Nearly all transfers are called this now. It would be safe to assume the fee was around 250-350k I reckon. Afterall, we really just wanted to get rid of an unmotivated player and his huge (by l1 standard) wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St.Patrik Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Readings Swedish site says that Reading will pay 500k now and another 500k if they go up yp the PL. They quoted some local paper regarding these figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morph Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 OK we've had this thread before. We know there are many dimensions to a transfer..agents fees, sell-on clauses, performance-related payments, other related to success criteria like play-off places or promotion. ...BUTwe paid (I think) £2 million for Rasiak. so can someone (in the know) please find out if we gave him away ...or what ? I'm sort of satisfied with a phrase like "..believed to be in the region of (fee.) OR .... £x ..rising to £y.... based on ...blah, blah). so just......HOW MUCH DID WE GET FOR THE RASIAK DEAL ???? David, I really don't think it matters. It is not our money any more. It is Mr Liebherr's, and I don't think he will be too concerned, I really don't. Regards Morph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Readings Swedish site says that Reading will pay 500k now and another 500k if they go up yp the PL. They quoted some local paper regarding these figures. Can you link to the paper please? I need the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNSUN Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Readings Swedish site says that Reading will pay 500k now and another 500k if they go up yp the PL. They quoted some local paper regarding these figures. They won't. So that's half a mill then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Readings Swedish site says that Reading will pay 500k now and another 500k if they go up yp the PL. They quoted some local paper regarding these figures. Only 500k it is then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sussexsaint Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 The most important thing was to get him off the wage bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 The most important thing was to get him off the wage bill Not always the case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murdock Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Got to agree with TDD and others on this one. Getting shot of a demotivated, want away, expensive player is what was really required, thankfully that seems to be mission accomplished. Roll on the next match with a more (if only a little) dedicated, tighter unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 David, I really don't think it matters. It is not our money any more. It is Mr Liebherr's, and I don't think he will be too concerned, I really don't. Regards Morph Probably one of the most sensible posts on here for a long time. People don't seem to realise that until we are informed otherwise all incoming and outgoing expenditure is the exclusive business of, sole owner, Marcus Liebherr's. Whether we got £300,000 or £30m is totally irrelevant. Now if ML decrees that the club must from here on in be self-sufficient then it becomes very important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Probably one of the most sensible posts on here for a long time. People don't seem to realise that until we are informed otherwise all incoming and outgoing expenditure is the exclusive business of, sole owner, Marcus Liebherr's. Whether we got £300,000 or £30m is totally irrelevant. Now if ML decrees that the club must from here on in be self-sufficient then it becomes very important. if we buy and sell players at big profits then its good for us and ML. So it is relevant. No doubt the bosses will be happy to have a few hundred K to spend on a striker who will get half Rasiaks wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 They won't. So that's half a mill then. I'd settle for that frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 OK we've had this thread before. We know there are many dimensions to a transfer..agents fees, sell-on clauses, performance-related payments, other related to success criteria like play-off places or promotion. ...BUTwe paid (I think) £2 million for Rasiak. so can someone (in the know) please find out if we gave him away ...or what ? I'm sort of satisfied with a phrase like "..believed to be in the region of (fee.) OR .... £x ..rising to £y.... based on ...blah, blah). so just......HOW MUCH DID WE GET FOR THE RASIAK DEAL ???? Who gives a toss, we have the fourth richest owner in British football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Probably one of the most sensible posts on here for a long time. People don't seem to realise that until we are informed otherwise all incoming and outgoing expenditure is the exclusive business of, sole owner, Marcus Liebherr's. Whether we got £300,000 or £30m is totally irrelevant. Now if ML decrees that the club must from here on in be self-sufficient then it becomes very important. But people DO know that. Why do you think that people do not understand? They are just interested in what we get for players. I am as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 27 August, 2009 Author Share Posted 27 August, 2009 (edited) David, I really don't think it matters. It is not our money any more. It is Mr Liebherr's, and I don't think he will be too concerned, I really don't. Regards Morph Of course it doesn't matter ..in one sense Morph, but it wasn't OUR money that bought him in the first place..it was (whoever "owned " the club ) when we bought him...Rupert Lowe, or ??? SLH, or (whoever). I'm sure it's only coffee money to Mr.Liebherr, but I like to think that we got something worthwhile out of the deal which is why I posed the question. It will certainly be a saving on salaries. If GR was on say 10K week, that's half a million a year ( + taxes) saved ... if 15K then its a saving of around £750K+ . Having " invested £2 million to buy him in the first place, I like to think that / the club / M.Liebherr / the fans might have got their moneys worth - even if he has been sold at a loss. Like buying a house, a car or a business - Players who are signed for a fee have a valuation as an asset. I don't mean to sound obsessive but it's a purely " business " question - and I work in business. Curiosity thats all. "undisclosed fees " can be anything ?.....though I'm fairly sure we got more than £100,000 ....but much less than £2 mill. Edited 27 August, 2009 by david in sweden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewell Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Now if ML decrees that the club must from here on in be self-sufficient then it becomes very important. Ummm wasn't that the first thing He and Cortese said in interviews when they took over? They said they want to run the club as a self-sufficient efficient business that operates within its own means! FWIW I think these undisclosed fees are a joke and the Governing bodies of the game should stop clubs from doing it. Where is the transparency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNSUN Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 I'd settle for that frankly. Oh naturally, so would we all, but my point was that Reading aren't going up this year. I'd be suprised if they even finished in the top half. We should've said £500k up front and £500k if they avoid relegation. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brmbrm Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Probably one of the most sensible posts on here for a long time. People don't seem to realise that until we are informed otherwise all incoming and outgoing expenditure is the exclusive business of, sole owner, Marcus Liebherr's. Whether we got £300,000 or £30m is totally irrelevant. Disagree. We buy for £2M, we sell for £500k. Did we get vakue for money? Was it a bad buy? All these things relate to the hindsight behind the decisions to buy/sell etc etc. OK, its hindsight, but ind sight is the ultimate judge of good decision makers. Same with Spiderman: bought for £1M, paid back nothing to date, so if e sell for £1.5M great deal! Sell for 500k $h!t deal! You've got to be judged by history, no matter who picks up the tab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 Disagree. We buy for £2M, we sell for £500k. Did we get vakue for money? Was it a bad buy? All these things relate to the hindsight behind the decisions to buy/sell etc etc. OK, its hindsight, but ind sight is the ultimate judge of good decision makers. Same with Spiderman: bought for £1M, paid back nothing to date, so if e sell for £1.5M great deal! Sell for 500k $h!t deal! You've got to be judged by history, no matter who picks up the tab. If you look at Rasiak's time here, i think you'll find that we actually recouped almost the entire £2m for him His loan fee to Bolton was at a fee of 250k, with 600k if they stayed up (they did - but he came back anyway) Then he went to Watford for a season, that would have included a loan fee i'm sure, probably not any higher than 100k though. So, we've recouped about 1.45m from the £2m. Not bad if you look at it that way. Also we only paid 1.5m up front for Greg....500k was paid as part of the loan fee to have him for the 2nd half of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW5 SAINT Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 David, I really don't think it matters. It is not our money any more. It is Mr Liebherr's, and I don't think he will be too concerned, I really don't. Regards Morph I thought were now supposed to be self financing, so I would say it does matter as whatever comes in would be available for reinvestment in the team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiltshire Saint Posted 27 August, 2009 Share Posted 27 August, 2009 David, I really don't think it matters. It is not our money any more. It is Mr Liebherr's, and I don't think he will be too concerned, I really don't. Regards Morph Probably one of the most sensible posts on here for a long time. People don't seem to realise that until we are informed otherwise all incoming and outgoing expenditure is the exclusive business of, sole owner, Marcus Liebherr's. Whether we got £300,000 or £30m is totally irrelevant. Now if ML decrees that the club must from here on in be self-sufficient then it becomes very important. What?! It is far from the most sensible post on here. The fact that the money belongs to ML doesn't mean it is of no interest to us. That's a stupid thing to say. Now I don't mean to upset you and rouse you out of your self imposed exile, but if ML gets £30million from player sales he is more likely to invest say £5million on player sales than if he only achieved £30,000......because in one transaction he would have made a profit and in the other he would be making a loss.......what you don't seem to understand is that it is his money. As far as I am aware he has said that the club will be run in a self sufficient manner and that money won't be endlessly thrown at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano6 Posted 28 August, 2009 Share Posted 28 August, 2009 Speaking of having threads before, how many times will the OS run the story "new players signing today" about some sh!tty autograph signing before they realise it's not funny any more??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 28 August, 2009 Share Posted 28 August, 2009 (edited) Why do people get 'jumped upon' every time they ask a question that "doesn't matter"? As we're a random collection of molecules hurtling through the universe at over 47 mph, you'll find that nothing actually matters. Not one thing. Thus, I hereby declare that ALL questions are banned on the basis that life itself is irrelevent. Ok? Bugger...broken the rule already. That's well and truely buggered up the space time continuum. FFS Edited 28 August, 2009 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 28 August, 2009 Share Posted 28 August, 2009 ...and anyway, it's much better that SFC isn't duty bound to reveal the value of it's trading anymore, now that it isn't part of a PLC, as it gives us a competitive edge in the business sense. Keeps our competitors guessing as to how much cash Mr Leibherr is circulating around the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 28 August, 2009 Share Posted 28 August, 2009 Got to agree with TDD and others on this one. Getting shot of a demotivated, want away, expensive player is what was really required, thankfully that seems to be mission accomplished. Roll on the next match with a more (if only a little) dedicated, tighter unit. Thats my view - I'd have got rid for £2.50 and a packet of chewing gum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now